IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO.23757 of 2004 Between: Vana Samrakshana Samithi, Rekulakunta Village, Rep. by its Chairperson, Bangi Jayanna, S/o. Balaswamy, aged about 30 Years, R/o. Rekulakunta village, B. Mattam Mandal, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Chairman, District Vana Samrakshna Samithi, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Divisional Forest Officer, Proddutur, Kadapa District. 3 The Forest Officer, Badvel, Kadapa District. 4 Rekula Kunta SubbaRao, S/o. Subbarayudu, HIndu, Rekulakunta, B. Matam Mandal, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not taking any action against the 4th respondent in acting as Member of the Vanasamrakshana Samithi of Rekulakunta Village, Kadapa District as illegal, arbitrary and violation of the principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.V.RAGHAVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR FORESTS Counsel for the Respondent No.4: ---- The Court, at the admission stage, made the following: ORDER: The petitioner, who is stated to be Chairperson of Vana Samrakshana Samithi, Rekulakunta village, B. Mattam Mandal, Kadapa District, made a representation dated 08.07.2004 to the 2nd respondent-Divisional Forest Officer, marking copies thereof to the respondents 1 and 3, alleging that the 4th respondent is interfering in the affairs of the Forest and collecting the compound fees. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though a representation was made to the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against the 4th respondent, no action has been taken so far. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Forests. Both counsel agreed to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage. Since the representation of the petitioner dated 08.07.2004 is said to be pending consideration before the 2nd respondent-Divisional Forest Officer, without going into the merits of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent-Divisional Forest Officer to consider the same and after issuing notice and calling for proper explanation from the 4th respondent, take appropriate action in the matter, expeditiously. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. _________________ (N.V. RAMANA, J) Date: 21.12.2004 Nsr/Mrr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector, Chairman, District Vana Samrakshna Samithi, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Divisional Forest Officer, Proddutur, Kadapa District. 3 The Forest Officer, Badvel, Kadapa District. 4 Two CCs to GP for Forests, High Court of AP, Hyderabad (OUT) 5 Two CD copies.