( 1 ) SINCE common questions of fact and law are involved in all these writ petitions, they are clubbed together, heard and disposed of by this common order.

( 2 ) ). Petitioner in W. P. No. 26284/1994 claims that he is the absolute owner and in possession of lands bearing Sy. Nos. 244, 256 and 257 of Garagndoor village of Somawarpet Taluk, Kodagu District. Petitioner claims that the lands are redeemed lands and he has got absolute right over the lands as well as trees standing therein. He has produced a copy of the Jamabandhi extract of Sy. Nos. 244, 256 and 257 for the years 1929-30, 1944 and 1993 and they are annexed as petition documents 'a, B and C' respectively. Petitioner with an intention to have better coffee cultivation in the lands in question, had approached the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Madikeri Division, Madikeri, (hereinafter referred to as 'forest Officer'), for grant of permission to cut and remove the overgrown trees. Pursuant to the request so made, it appears that the Forest Officer had accorded permission to the petitioner to cut and remove the overgrown shade trees in the lands in question. It appears, petitioner had cut more number of trees than what was permitted by the Forest Officer. In view of this illegal felling of trees by the petitioner, the Range Forest Officer of the area had booked a forest offence case in FOC No. 47/92-93 dated 23-2-1993 and seized the timber prepared out of illegally felled trees. Since the petitioner offered to compound the forest offence by paying the value of the materials illegally felled, the Forest Officer after accepting the offer had directed him to pay a sum of Rs. 1,39,087/-, being the value of timber. It appears, petitioner after paying the said amount under protest, had taken possession of the seized materials and transported the same to its destination.

( 3 ) PETITIONER by his representation dated 13-7-1994, requested the Forest Officer to refund the seigniorage collected from him on the ground that the lands in possession are redeemed lands and he has got absolute right over the lands as well as trees standing therein, and further since he has cultivated coffee in the said lands, it is exempted from the purview of the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The Forest Officer after obtaining the report of the Revenue Officer, has rejected the claim made by the petitioner in his representation dated 13-7-1994 by his order dated 17-8-1994. Aggrieved by this order of rejection, petitioner is before this Court for an appropriate writ and direction.

( 4 ) IN W. P. No. 34459/1995, the fact situation is more or less identical. Petitioners in this writ petition have paid a sum of Rs. 1,23,995/- being the seigniorage value of the trees and also a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and have transported the trees from the lands in their possession, which they had cut without the permission of the Forest Officer. Since their request for refund of the aforesaid amount is rejected by the Forest Officer, they are before this Court for appropriate directions.

( 5 ) IN both these petitions, respondents have filed their detailed statement of objections, justifying their impugned orders and resisting the reliefs sought for by the petitioners. Their primary objection seems to be that the Deputy Commissioner of the District has opined in both the cases that the lands in question cannot be declared as redeemed lands. Since the petitioners have failed to produce sufficient records in support of their stand that the lands are redeemed lands and therefore, they have absolute right and interest on the trees standing on the lands. They further assert that the claim of the petitioners that they have redeemed the trees standing on the lands by paying the necessary value of the trees cannot be accepted since petitioners have not produced any documentary evidence in support of their assertion. Nextly, it is stated that in the revenue records available in the