Telangana High Court
Maloth Bhaysingh vs The State Of Telangana on 10 September, 2025
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.15757 OF 2025
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents No.2 to 5 in threatening the petitioner to dispossess him from his argicultural land admeasuign Ac.3-12 guntas, situated in Compartment No.8, Karepalli Beat, Tallegudem, Patimeedigumpu, Cheemalapadu Habitation, Singareni Mandal, Khammam Distrit, covered under ROFR.No.ROFR022100174042 issued under the Recognition of Forest Rights Act, 2006, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess and interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the said land and to pass such order or orders.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Forests, appearing for respondents No.1 to 4 and the learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondent No.5.
3. Respondent No.2 filed counter affidavit. The relevant paragraphs are extracted below:-
"3. That in reply to para no.1 to 3, it is submitted that the contents of these paragraphs are general in nature. The petitioner's status as a Scheduled Tribe resident holding RoFR title over 3.12 acres of forest land vide RoFRPattaNo.ROFR022100174042 issued during 2023 -2- year, is admitted. The said RoFR land location of the Writ Petitioner is falling in Compt.No.8 of Cheemalapadu Reserve Forests of Patimidigumpu Beat of Thallagudem Section of Karepally Range of Singareni Mandal of Khammam District. However, the allegations that Forest Department officials attempted to dispossess the petitioner or directed him to vacate the land are categorically denied. The petitioner continues to be in peaceful possession of his RoFR land.
5. In reply to para no. 5 & 6, it is specifically denied that Forest Officers are supporting or colluding with unofficial Respondent No.6. No such coordination or favour has been extended by the Forest Department/Respondent No.2 to 4. The allegations made are vague, unsubstantiated, and defamatory in nature.
11. Further it is respectfully submitted that:
i. The petitioner continues to lawfully possess and cultivate his RoFR land granted to him.
ii. The Forest Department has not initiated or threatened any eviction or trenching activity as alleged. iii. No complaint or representation has been received from the petitioner."
4. In view of the above, it is noticed that there is no interference by the respondents with the possession of the petitioner over the subject land. Therefore, the cause in the writ petition does not survive.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
-3-
6. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 10.09.2025.
dv