IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.13921 OF 2005 Dt.02.02.2010 Between: D. Pullaiah and others … Petitioners And The District Collector Kurnool, Kurnool District and others … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri M. Subba Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: A.G.P. for Forests THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.13921 OF 2005 ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the petitioners, who are in occupation of certain pieces of land in S. Nos.92/1, 93/8, 150, 160, 160/2 and 172 of Chinnarajupalem Village (Gulam Aliabad), Banaganapalli Mandal, Kurnool District, filed this Writ Petition, feeling aggrieved by the action of the Forest Department in interfering with the petitioners’ agricultural operations. The petitioners claimed that while some of them were granted D-Form pattas, the applications of other petitioners for grant of such D-Form pattas are still pending with the Revenue Department. According to the petitioners, they are in possession of the lands referred to above for several years and cultivating the same. As the forest officials have been frequently interfering with their possession by claiming that the lands in their occupation fall within the reserve forest area, they have approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.3 to 6, it is inter alia stated as under: “In reply to para 7 it is submitted that, the forest areas of Gulamaliabad Reserve Forest are clearly demarcated on map and the description is also spelt out in great detail in the Reserve Forest Notification, hence it may not be necessary to conduct a joint survey. However, respondents are ready to extend cooperation in conducting a joint inspection of the lands in question so as to settle the dispute. Issuing pattas inside Reserve Forest areas is a gross violation of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, hence the question of violation of principles of natural justice does not arise.” The question whether the lands in question form part of reserve forest area or not can be decided only after proper survey is conducted and boundaries are demarcated. While averring that such a demarcation on map was already made and the lands were notified as a reserve forest, in the counter affidavit filed by respondent Nos.3 to 6 it is fairly conceded that a joint inspection of the land can be undertaken. In view of the clear stand taken by respondent Nos.3 to 6, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 on one side and respondent Nos.3 to 6 on the other, to conduct a joint inspection in the presence of one of the representatives of the petitioners, after giving notice to him. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents may issue notice to petitioner No.1 – D. Pullaiah, who will represent the other petitioners as well. Such a notice should be given by respondent No.1 – District Collector to petitioner No.1 for a joint inspection. Respondent No.1 shall, in coordination with the Forest Department, constitute an inspection team for conducting of joint inspection and demarcate the boundaries of the reserve forest with reference to the existing survey report and the maps. On the basis of the joint inspection report, respondent No.1 shall pass appropriate order depending upon the result of the joint inspection and communicate such an order within a period of one month from the date of the joint inspection. If it is found that the lands in occupation of the petitioners fell outside the reserve forest area, the Forest Department, represented by respondent Nos.3 to 6, should not interfere with the petitioners’ enjoyment of the lands in question. If, on the other hand, the lands are found to be within the notified reserve forest area, the respondents are entitled to prevent the petitioners from cultivating the lands. If an adverse order is passed by respondent No.1, the petitioners are entitled to approach the competent Civil Court for adjudication of the dispute, and also avail other remedies, if any, available under the provisions of the extant Forest Acts. Subject to the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P. No.17666 of 2005 and W.V.M.P. No.2454 of 2006, filed by the respective parties, are disposed of. ______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 02.02.2010 bnr