The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.21259 of 2010 Date: 15.09.2011 Between: 1.Lavudya Bikku and 2 others ..... Petitioners AND 1.Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri N.Ravi Prasad Counsel for respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4: GP for Forest Counsel for respondent No.2: GP for Revenue The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents, in granting pattas to the petitioners in respect of Ac.7.50 hectares of land in Compartment No.3 of Beat Suraram Range, Suraram, Paloncha Mandal, Khammam District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that they are in possession of 7.50 hectares of land, which forms part of Old Suraram Forest Beat, from 20th October, 2004; that they made an application on 20-12-2004 seeking grant of pattas under the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers ( Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (for short ‘the 2006 Act’) and; that the pattas have not been granted so far. The petitioners’ grievance is that, while not granting pattas, the respondents have been harassing them by registering criminal cases on the ground that they are in unlawful possession of the forest lands. A detailed counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No.3 wherein it is inter alia stated that the claims of the petitioners were considered as per the eligibility criteria contained in the 2006 Act with reference to the cut- off date i.e., 13-12-2005 and that as per the road map for implementation of the 2006 Act, the last date for receiving claims by Grama Sabha/Forest Rights Committee is 31-05- 2008 and that no fresh claims shall be entertained. It is further stated that after conducting survey and considering the claims, received before the cut off date, all the eligible claimants were given pattas. The counter-affidavit denied the petitioners’ claim that they are in possession of the subject property one year before the cut-off date and described the said claim as an invention to get pattas. The respondents also denied the claim of the petitioners that they have made any claim by way of application for grant of pattas. At the hearing, Sri N.Ravi Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioners, invited the attention of this Court to the purported application, dated 20-12-2004, to substantiate the plea of the petitioners that they have made an application for grant of pattas under the 2006 Act before the cut-off date. In the face of the denial of receiving any such claim by the respondents, the burden lies on the petitioners to show that such an application is made. The petitioners have not filed any proof to show that the purported application, dated 20-12-2004, was received by the respondents. In the absence of any such proof, the petitioners’ claim that they made an application for grant of pattas cannot be accepted. The petitioners also failed to show that they were in possession of the subject property as on the cut-off date i.e., 13-12-2005. Therefore, no relief can be granted in favour of the petitioners in this Writ Petition. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, interim order, dated 27-08-2010, is vacated and WVMP.No.5530 of 2011 in/& WPMP.No.27050 of 2010, are disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 15th September, 2011 LUR