Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sriram Nagaratnam vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 June, 2021
Author: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
Bench: M.Satyanarayana Murthy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.11163 of 2021
ORDER:-
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"declaring the action of the respondent in seeking to disposes the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac. 3.70 cents situated at Vetamamidi Village, Addateegala Mandal, East Godavari District, which was granted to the petitioner under Schedule Tribes Forest Rights vide Patta No. 0403110019 as wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the above mentioned land without following due process of law....."
The case of the petitioner is that she is a member of Schedule Tribe belonging to Valmiki Community and a resident of Vetamamidi Village, Addateegala Mandal, East Godavari District, which is Tribal Area. Since the petitioner is a landless poor tribal, the respondents 2, 5 and 6 have granted patta under Schedule Tribe and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 to an extent of Ac. 3.70 cents situated at Vetamamidi Village, Addateegala Mandal, East Godavari District, vide Patta No. 0403110019. Since the date of grant of patta, the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the said property. Since February-2020 the same is in force as on today. While the petitioner raised Cashew Garden in the said land, surprisingly the respondents 3 and 4 came to the land and stopped the agricultural operations, by threatening her not to enter into the land and forcibly attempted to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land, without following any procedure. As the patta granted in favour of the petitioner is in force, the respondents 3 2 and 4 have no right to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the land in an extent of Ac. 3.70 cents situated in Vetamamidi Village, Addateegala Mandal, East Godavari District, which is a tribal area and therefore the petitioner sought to declare the action of the respondents as illegal, arbitrary and requested to issue a direction to the respondents not to interfere with possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property.
During hearing, K. Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions urged in the petition, while drawing the attention of this court to the notice issued in Annexure-II personal Forest Right note issued under Rule 8(h) of the Scheduled Tribe and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (For short "the Act") The Aadhar Card of the petitioner and other details would show that the petitioner was granted patta and she is in possession and enjoyment of the property since February-2020.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forest fairly submitted that the subject land was granted to the petitioner and this respondent authorities are not interfering with possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the subject property.
Whereas, the learned Government Pleader for Revenue reported no instructions and requested to pass appropriate order, directing the respondents to follow due process of law, in the event, if the respondents intends to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land.
As seen from the material on record and pleadings it is undisputed fact that patta is granted in favour of petitioner for the 3 land in an extent of Ac. 3.70 cents by 6th respondent as submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Forest, the petitioner cultivating the same continuously, since, February-2020. When patta was granted in their favour regulation 8(h) of the Act by the 6th respondent, respondents 3 and 4, who are the revenue officials, are not entitled to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property, except by due process of law. Even otherwise, it is a forest land and it is under the control of the 6th respondent only.
Therefore, I find that it is a fit case to declare the action of the respondents 3 and 4 as illegal, arbitrary and without any authority of law, while directing the respondents not to dispossess petitioner from the disputed land, except by due process of law.
In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed, declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in attempting to dispossess the petitioner during subsistence of patta granted in favour of the petitioner by the 6th respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. Consequently, respondents 3 and 4 are directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in an extent of Ac. 3.70 cents situated at Vetamamidi Village, Addateegala Mandal, East Godavari District, except by due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed.
_________________________________________ JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Date: 24.06.2021 KK 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No.11163 of 2021 Date: 24.06.2021 KK