APHC010046902023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3330]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No: 2381/2023 Between:

Neerukattu Ramanjaneyulu ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. S SYAMSUNDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR FORESTS The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:

"….to issue a writ order or more particularly in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 3^rd Respondent bearing Rc.No.12/2022-Fro(D), Dated 01.09.2022 is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Forest Act, and consequently to direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the land in R.S.No.165, to an extent of Ac.2-50 cents, Khata Number: 750, situated Gulamaliyabadu Village, Banaganapalle Mandal, Nandyal District, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and pass such other orders……."

2. It is the case of the petitioner herein that the 4^th respondent, vide Rc.No.16/DAR/1416 dated 17.11.2006, granted D-Form patta in the name of Uppari Neerukattu Obulamma, wife of Maddileti, who is the mother of the petitioner herein. Since then, the petitioner and his mother are in possession of the said land in an extent of Acs.3.00 cents in Coppt.No.325 and an extent of Acs.2.50 cents in Sy.No.165 situated in Gulamaliyabadu village, Banaganapalle Mandal, Nandyal District, and the petitioner’s name was mutated in the revenue records and obtained pattadar passbooks and title deeds and allotted Katha No.750 to the aforesaid land and the petitioner had been irrigating the land by investing huge amounts. Now the 3^rd respondent has issued the impugned proceedings bearing Rc.No.12/2022-Fro(D), dated

01.09.2022, directing the petitioner to show cause for eviction from the land allegedly the petitioner encroached the land to an extent of Acs.3.00 cents in Coppt.No.325 of Gulam Aliabad North Reserve Forest, Gulamaliabad Beat, which is contrary to the provisions of the A.P.Forest Act and the petitioner herein has submitted his explanation on 30.09.2022 to the notice dated 01.09.2022.

3. The contention of the petitioner herein is that unless the 4^th respondent decides the nature of land, the 3^rd respondent has no jurisdiction to take action under the provisions of the A.P.Forest Act. Hence, prayed to set aside the impugned notice dated 01.09.2022 as it is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Government of A.P. v. Thummala Krishna Rao and another for the proposition that when the petitioner is in longstanding possession and when there is a genuine dispute in between the petitioner and the Government on the question of title, the Government may succeed in establishing its title to the property until that is done and the respondents cannot evict the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied on another order of this Court in W.P.No.18203 of 2021 dated 25.08.2021 for the very same proposition.

6. The 3^rd respondent filed counter and stated that as per the provisions of Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, any patta granted in a forest block notified under Section 4 of the A.P.Forest Act, is not valid and in view of the prohibition contained in the Forest Act, the patta granted by the 4^th respondent is not valid and hence the petitioner is deemed to be an occupier or encroacher of forest land and the issue of pattadar passbook for invalid patta is of no consequence. It is also stated that the land was notif