Point of Law: Public Interest litigation- filling the pond [water body] and levelling the same to lay house sites- land which is subject matter of dispute is a Government land and falls outside the limits of forest area- pictures relied upon by the learned counsel for the Petitioners do not conclusively establish that the subject land and the land in the pictures filed, is one and the same.

ORDER :

C. Praveen Kumar, J.

1. This present Writ Petition, in the form of Public Interest litigation, came to be filed challenging the action of the Respondents herein in filling the pond [water body] and levelling the same to lay house sites in an extent of Ac.1.40 Cents of land in Survey No. 333 of Nagapatla Village, Chandragiri Mandal, Chittoor District, which is classified and reserved as ‘Forest Buffer’ and ‘Bandi Daari”, as illegal, improper and incorrect and violative of guidelines issued under various G.Os from time-to-time.

2. The Petitioners Nos. 1 and 3 are working as Correspondent and Secretary, respectively, of Sri Vinayaka Vidya Mandir High School, Rangampeta, Chandragiri Mandal, while Petitioner Nos. 2 and 4 are residents of Rangampeta Village. The Respondents with a view to allot house sites under ‘Navaratnalu -Pedalandariki Illu’ scheme [for short ‘Scheme’], identified land admeasuring Ac.1.40 Cents in Survey No. 333 and is alleged to have carried out necessary civil works for development of a layout, which includes filling of soil, leveling and marking of plots.

3. It is averred that the said land is abutting the reserve forest, which is declared and notified as ‘National Park’ as per the provisions of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. Hence, it is pleaded that any developmental activity undertaken would disturb the environment of wildlife and also the fragile nature of the forest.

4. The averments in the affidavit also show that a pond, which is sought to be filled up, is being used not only by the surrounding villages to quench the thirst of their livestock, but also the water in the said pond improves the ground water level. Having regard to the above, in the month of January 2020 the Respondents under MNREGA scheme have deepened the depth of the tank to improve the percolation levels. Though the works of improving the tank were undertaken in the month of January 2020, but in a hasty manner and on the illegal advice of some of the Respondents, the said land is now being converted into house sites.

5. Referring to Board Standing Orders 15.4 and Section 58(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and G.O.Ms. No. 510 Revenue (Lands-1) Department, dated 30.12.2019, it is averred that the action taken by the authorities is illegal, improper and incorrect.

6. By an Order dated 30.07.2020, this Court ordered status quo in respect of land in question, to be maintained and the same shall not be classified for the purpose of allotment of house site pattas under ‘Navaratnalu – Pedalandariki Illu’ scheme, until the next date of listing. On 02.11.2020 the said interim order was extended until further orders.

7. Counter came to be filed by the Respondents disputing the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the Petition. In the counter filed by the 2nd Respondent – District Collector, it is stated that the land in Survey No. 333 admeasuring Ac.1.40 cents was proposed for distribution of house sites under the Scheme for 46 beneficiaries of A.Rangampeta Village of Chandragiri Mandal, and the said land is classified as ‘Gayalu’ as per A-Register of Nagapatla Revenue Village. Thereafter, the classification of said land is changed from Gayalu to AWD vide proceedings dated 18.08.1936. It is said that the subject land is abutting NH 71, and there are residential hostels adjacent to the subject land. It is specifically stated that there is no pond or water streams as stated in the affidavit. It has been categorically averred that the said land is existing within the vicinity of Sri Vidyanikethan Educational Institutions at Rangampeta, and the allegation that the subject land is classified as ‘Revenue’, ‘Forest Buffer Zone’ and ‘Bandi Dari’, is incorrect. It is categorically stated that the land in question was classified as ‘Gayalu’, later converted as A.W.D. in the year 1936 and in the year 1955, the land was reserved against assignment, and, accordingly, included in the prohibited list under Section 22A of the R