THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDAIAH W.P.NO.16124 OF 2009 O R D E R Heard Sri G.Krishna Murthy learned counsel for the petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command Area Development and Sri K.S.R. Prasad for unofficial respondents. 2. The writ petitioner is Adi Andhra Field Labour Co-operative Society Ltd., Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna District and it is represented by its president. The case of the petitioner – society is that it is having 142 members, who are all landless poor and they have been granted lease in the year 1950 to enjoy the green grass and usufruct of the trees on the Krishna river left old bund mile 37/3 to 38/2 and it was being renewed from time to time and recently it was renewed by the 3rd respondent – Executive Engineer vide his memo No.MC/383 Rc. dated 2.11.2001 for the year 2001-2002 and by proceedings in memo No.CB/Su/Mc/15 Rc. dated 8.1.2008, it was renewed till 31.5.2009. Before the expiration of the lease, the petitioner – Society made representation on 8.5.2009 for renewal of lease and as there was no response, again they made another representation on 27.6.2009 and the same is kept pending. Aggrieved by the non-renewal of lease, the present writ petition is filed. 3. The 3rd respondent – Executive Engineer filed counter affidavit and while admitting the granting of the lease over the subject land, stated that the petitioner – society was renewed lease up to 31.5.2009 and there was no renewal further. It is stated that representation for the renewal of lease to the petitioner – society cannot be granted as there are objections for the adjacent ryots for creating inconvenience to the ryots in their day to day activities, as they wholly depend upon their lands for their livelihood. If the lease is granted to the petitioner-society, the adjacent ryots cannot do the cultivation, which is their livelihood. A lawyer notice dated 8.6.2009 was also received in their office on behalf of the ryots requesting not to renew the lease to the petitioner-society, which is creating inconvenience to the ryots. With these averments inter alia the writ petition was sought to be dismissed. 4. The unofficial respondents also filed counter affidavits to the effect that petitioner - society is causing inconvenience to the adjacent ryots, as the members of the society are not allowing the villagers and cattle to pass through the public road and they are creating law and order problem and they also sought to rely on certain paper clippings to show that cattle and also the people are suffering and hence sought to dismiss the writ petition. 5. The writ petitioner filed reply and denied the averments made in the counter affidavits. 6. From the above material on record, there is no dispute that the petitioner – society was granted lease in respect of the subject land for enjoying the green grass and usufruct of the fruit bearing trees and the same is renewed till 31.5.2009 and even before the expiration of the lease, the petitioner – society made representation on 8.5.2009 and as there was no response, it made another representation on 27.6.2009 and the case of the petitioner – society is that it having 142 members who are all landless poor and if the lease is not granted, they will be deprived of livelihood. On the other hand the case of the respondents is that the members of the petitioner – society are not allowing the villages and cattle to pass through the public road, adjacent to the said land and that they are creating law and order problem. 7. Along with the vacate petition filed by the 3rd respondent – Executive Engineer, letter no. CB/Supdt./MC/700M dated 26.6.2009 addressed by the 3rd respondent – Executive Engineer to one S.Balaji Rao, Advocate, Ramanaidupet, Machilipatnam, is filed. This letter is addressed by the 3rd respondent to the said Advocate for his legal notice asking the 3rd respondent not to renew the lease. The relevant portion of the said letter is extracted as under: “With reference to your letter no. cited, you have issued legal notice on behalf of your clients Sri Rayana Gopala rao and others of Merkanapalli, Krosurivaripalem villages of Mopidevi Mandal regarding not renewal of the lease belongs to old Karakatta of Krishna River from Mile 37/3 to 38/2 on behalf of Adi Andhra field labour co-operative society, Merkanapalli. In this connection, it is to inform that in the year 2001, temporary lease was sanctioned to the above society vide this office memo no.MC/383 rc dated 2.11.2001 for cutting grass to enjoy fruit bearing on the existing palm trees in the reach from mile 37/3 to 38/2 of Krishna River old Karakatta in Merakanapalli Panchayt limits of Mopidevi mandal. The lease was approved on behalf of Adi Andhra Field Labour Co-operative Society, Merakanapalli. The members of the said society are very poor and the landless. Hence for their livelihood the Irrigation Department had given on lease of vacant land of old karakatta which belongs to government property. Since the permission was given by the department, the said society members are utilizing the facility and also the society is paying lease amount regularly to the Department. At present the lease period has been expired by 31.5.2009. In the notice, the clients are in the opinion that the lease holders are objecting thousands of public and school going children not to pass on the karakatta and also they are creating inconvenience to the people if the lease be renewed to the above society. The opinion of the clients are only their impression. It is baseless because the land was leased out only for cutting grass and enjoy fruit bearing on existing trees. The land was leased out to the S.C. Society only for their livelihood. This is no substantial record available that the Society people have objected the clients on the public road. Hence, the interventions of the clients are baseless. In view of the above, it is to inform that factual position in the matter is submitted to the District Collector, Krishna, Machilipatnam with reference to the Grievance position no.2009 May 27N 001 dated 27.5.2009 and a copy of the same is submitted to the Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Vijayawada for taking further course of action on the matter. Further it is inform that necessary action will be informed as per instruction received from higher officials.” 8. From the above letter addressed by the 3rd respondent – Executive Engineer, it could be seen that the petitioner – society was granted lease and the members of the society are landless poor and the land was leased only for their livelihood and the society is paying lease amount regularly to the department. Further the case of the respondents that the landholders are objecting thousands of public and school going children to pass the land and creating inconvenience to the people if the lease be renewed to the above society, is found to be baseless and there is also no substantial record available that the society people have objected on the public road. Accordingly the 3rd respondent intimated the factual position to the District Collector, Krishna, Machilipatnam. There is no material on record to show that the District Collector has taken any decision in the matter. 9. Therefore, the averments made in the counter affidavit are found to be contrary to the version of the 3rd respondent – Executive Engineer in the letter dated 26.6.2009 addressed to an Advocate, who issued legal notice based on the instructions of his client that the members of the petitioner – society are creating inconvenience to the general public. Further the society is regular in payment of lease amount. 10. It is to be noticed that the members of the petitioner – society are landless poor persons and they are eking out their livelihood from cutting the grass and enjoying the fruit bearing trees, which are in existence over the subject land. The lease was granted till 31.5.2009 and admittedly the petitioners made two representations dated 8.5.2009 and 27.6.2009 i.e., one representation much prior to the expiration of lease on 31.5.2009. In view of these circumstances, the attitude of the official respondents in not taking appropriate decision in the light of the above facts and circumstances and keeping in view the object of grating the lease to landless poor persons and; passing orders in accordance with law, is arbitrary and unjust and amounts to violation of the principles of natural justice. 11. Hence, in view of the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the following direction: “The official respondents shall consider the representation of the petitioner – society for renewal of lease, keeping in view the above facts and circumstances and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the petitioner – society shall not be evicted from the subject land.” 12. There shall be no order as to costs. AVS ------------------------------------- 03—06—2010