The legal principle established is that claims for land recognition under the Forest Rights Act must be supported by credible evidence, and fabricated documents invalidate such claims.

ORDER :

Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.

The petitioners, representing the Chenchu community (a Scheduled Tribe), challenges the proceedings in Lr. No. E1/3044/2003 dated 19.04.2011 issued by the 1st Respondent as illegal and contrary to the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. The petitioners, traditional forest dwellers, have occupied and cultivated 3-4 acres of forest land in Kandlakunta Village, Mahabubnagar District, for 30-40 years without objection from the Forest Department. They collectively occupy approximately 300 acres and have invested effort and resources to make the land cultivable. Supporting documents, such as Adangal/Pahanis, evidence their possession. The State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.20 on 31.03.1999 to form Village Tribal Development Associations (VTDAs) in tribal habitations. The VTDA President of Jangamreddipalli requested funds for deepening a 'Cheruvu,' leading to the release of Rs. 2.75 lakh by ITDA (PTG-Chenchu) based on a beneficiary list (Rc. No. A/942/97 dated 29.04.1999) that included the petitioners. However, disputes arose from non-tribals, leading to writ petitions. Under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, the petitioners applied for land titles on 18.02.2008.

The Mandal Revenue Officer conducted an enquiry and included their names in the report. Due to delays, they filed W.P.No.8523 of 2008, whereby this Court by order dated 11.06.2008 directing the District Collector to process their applications. Nenavath Jagan and others challenged the order passed in W.P.No.8523 of 2008 by filing W.A.No. 1236 of 2008, which was disposed of on 05.08.2009 directing as follows:

"In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and especially having regard to the fact that this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not venture to go into all such disputed claims or decide possession or entitlement thereto, it is felt desirable that the concerned authorities immediately take up the issue and hold a regular and comprehensive enquiry and determine all such questions as to the entitlement and take appropriate decision and pass orders for grant of pattas to eligible persons. In this connection, it is felt desirable that the District Collector, Mahabubnagar shall make such exercise in more expeditious manner after providing due and necessary opportunity to the parties concerned and as well giving a due publicity in and around the concerned place with sufficient time gap”

2. Pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.A.No. 1236 of 2008 dated 05.08.2009, the respondents conducted an enquiry into the petitioners' eligibility. However, when they failed to comply, the petitioners filed C.C.No. 722 of 2010 for contempt. In response, the respondents filed a counter and issued proceedings dated 18.03.2011, rejecting the petitioners' claims. This Court found fault with this decision, noting that the 2^nd respondent's report was submitted on the same day (18.03.2011), indicating a lack of proper consideration and opportunity for the petitioners. The court directed the 1st Respondent to provide the petitioners an opportunity to present their case and reconsider the matter. Notices were issued for an inquiry on 16.04.2011, where the petitioners appeared and submitted supporting documents. However, the 1st Respondent issued the impugned proceedings in Lr.No. E1/3044/2003 dated 19.04.2011, leading to the closure of C.C.No. 722 of 2010 on 24.06.2011. The petitioners allege that the respondents are issuing pattas to ineligible candidates from Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes due to political pressure, which would cause