IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No. 2281 of 2005 Between: 1 B. Chandrakanth, S/o B. Ramulu, 2 B. Santosh, s/o B. Ramulu, Both are R/o Pardi (B) Village,Kubeer Mandal, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Adilabad District. 2 The Conservator of Forest, Adilabad District. 3 The Divisional Forest Officer, Nirmal, Adilabad district. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal, Adilabad 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 will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction, or issue an appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus:- (i) directing the respondents herein to pay compensation for the damage caused to the crop of petitioners herein, by the wild animals ( pigs) on the agricultural land to the extent of 9 acres in Sy.No. 58/ (Aa) (b) 6 acres 14 guntas in Sy.No. 55/ (Aa); (c) 2 acres 31 guntas in Sy.No. 58, situated at Pardi Village, Mandal Kubeer, District Adilabad in pursuant to G.O.Ms.No. 112 Environments , Forests Science and Tecnology ( For III), Dept, Dated 3-8- 1998, (ii) Declare the action of respondents in not paying the said compensation is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India, and against the G.O.Ms.No. 112, dated 3-8-1998; (iii) And to pass any such other order or orders as deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners:SRI S.CHANDRASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No. 2281 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioners are brothers. They are statedly owners of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.18.05 (Acs.9.00 in survey No.58/AA, Acs.6.14 in survey No.55/A and Acs.2.31 in survey No.58) of Pardi Village, Kubeer Mandal in Adilabad District. It is their case that they raised cotton crop in the entire extent of land. In September 2004 the wild pigs (wild boars) damaged the crop, which resulted loss of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- being costs of 50 quintals of cotton. Therefore, they made a representation seeking compensation as per the Government Orders in G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 03.08.1998. They also allege that on 15.09.2004 the Sarpanch conducted panchanama. Subsequently, the Mandal Revenue Inspector conducted panchanama on 24.09.2004 opining the crop damage. Based on the two panchanamas the Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer addressed to third respondent to take necessary action for payment of compensation to the petitioners. In spite of the same, compensation was not paid. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners ﬁled the instant writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to pay compensation for the crop loss caused due to wild boar attack. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled by the third respondent opposing the writ prayer. It is stated that the application received from the petitioners was sent to Forest Range oﬃcer to inspect the spot and submit a report as per G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 03.08.1998. On his instructions, the Deputy Range oﬃcer, Kubeer, inspected the land in survey Nos.55 and 58 and informed that the lands are 5 to 6 kilometres away from the Reserve Forest, and that the two survey numbers are nearer to Pardi(B) Village. Subsequently, the Assistant Conservator of Forests, Nirmal, enquired into the matter and vide letter dated 02.03.2005 informed that as per the statements of adjacent land owner of survey No.56 and the Chairperson of Vana Samrakshana Samithi Pardi-B, no wild boars have entered into the lands of any cultivator including lands of petitioners. Therefore, the claim made by the petitioners is false. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the stand taken by the respondents in the counter aﬃdavit denying the payment for damages for the crop loss to the petitioners is contrary to the instructions issued by G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 03.08.1998. Elaborating further, the learned Counsel submits that as per the instructions, the damage caused to the crops by wild animals has to be assessed by the revenue authorities, and therefore, when once the revenue authorities have recommended for damages, the forest oﬃcials cannot again conduct inspection to deny the relief to the petitioners. These contentions are refuted by the learned Government Pleader for Forests. Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.Ms.No.51, dated 11.03.1992, issued orders ﬁxing the extent of compensation payable to the victims and farmers whose crops have been damaged due to wild life attack. Subsequently, by G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 03.08.1998, the Government modiﬁed orders approving the revised proposals sent by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Andhra Pradesh, for payment of compensation for loss of life or injury to human life and cattle killed due to attack of tigers or other wild animals in the State as speciﬁed in the rules in Appendix-I, II, III & IV to G.O.Ms.No.112. Appendix-III to the said Government Order reads as under. APPENDIX – III RULES FOR PAYMENT OF EX-GRATIA FOR DAMAGES TO HOUSES OR CROP OR ANY PROPERTY DUE TO ATTACK BY THE WILD ANIMALS The compensation for damage to house or crop or any other property shall be paid as follows:- a) Damage to house or property:- The actual value as assessed by the Mandal revenue Officer concerned. b) The Damages caused to crop the compensation shall be paid as follows:- i) The damage caused to agricultural crop other than paddy and sugarcane be paid upto Rs.1,000/- per acre. ii) The compensation for the damages caused to paddy crop be paid upto Rs.2,000/- per acre if entire crops is damaged. iii) The compensation for the damage caused to sugarcane crop may be paid upto Rs.2,500/- per acre if entire crop is damaged. iv) The compensation for the damage caused to grown up Mango Trees and Coconut Trees may be paid upto Rs.200/- per tree for total damage of trees. v) Damage to Horticulture crops like Banana and Citrus Fruit Trees, be compensated based on the assessment of Revenue Officials. Clause (b)(i) to (v) of Appendix-III prescribe the amount of compensation payable as damages caused to agricultural crops other than paddy and sugarcane, for paddy crop, for sugarcane crop, mango and coconut trees and Horticulture crops like banana. In all these cases, the compensation is to be based on assessment of revenue officials. Therefore, there is force in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the assessment made by revenue officials is final. As noticed supra, on receiving the application of the petitioners on 15.09.2004 the members of Gram Panchayat conducted panchanama and assessed crop loss. Subsequently, Mandal Revenue Inspector conducted another panchanama on 24.09.2004 and gave a report based on which, Mandal Revenue Oﬃcer recommended payment of compensation for crop loss. Therefore, denial of compensation for loss caused to the petitioners’ cotton crop is unjustified. In the result, for the above reasons, the writ petition is allowed directing the third respondent to pay the compensation at the rate of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) per acre under clause (b)(i) of Appendix-III to G.O.Ms.No.112, Environment Forests Science & Technology (FOR.III) Department, dated 03.08.1998. This exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 07.11.2008 vs To 1 The District Collector, Adilabad District. 2 The Conservator of Forest, Adilabad District. 3 The Divisional Forest Officer, Nirmal, Adilabad district. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal, Adilabad District. 5 2CCs to G.P for Forests, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 6 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{AVLR}