IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 13267 of 2008 Between: Mr. Surya Prakash jaju, S/o. Ramvallabh jaju, R/o. H.No.2-3-119, Shantinagar, Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahasildar, Zaheerabad Mandal, Zaheerabad, Medak District. 2 Md. Zaffar Ali, S/o. Kasimsab, R/o. h.No.3-2-95, Gadi Mohalla, Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District. 3 Mohd. Jafer, S/o. Kasimsab, R/o. h.No.3-2-95, Gadi Mohalla, Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District. 4 Abdul Jaleel, S/o. Kasimsab, R/o. h.No.3-2-95, Gadi Mohalla, Zaheerabad Town and Mandal, Medak District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, call for the records and quash the impugned order ofthe 1st respondent vide proceedings No.E/AP Walta/2008 dated Nil -6-2008, signed on 6-6-2008 being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300(A) of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of Principles of Natural Jutice and consequently declare that no permission is required under the Land, Water and Trees Act for cutting the trees in the agricultural lands and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.LAKSHMI NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 13267 of 2008 Order: The petitioner, who claims to be the owner of the land admeasuring Ac.1-09 guntas in Survey No.180/A and Ac.1-09 guntas in Survey No.180/E, situated at Zaheerabad village and Mandal, Medak District, made an application to respondent No.1-Tahsildar, seeking permission to cut down 12 Mango trees situated on the bunds of the above said land, and respondent No.1- Tahsildar, based on the recommendations made by the Village Revenue Officer, and the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Zahirabad, granted permission for the same, by order dated 27.05.2008. Later on, based on a complaint made by respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein on 02.06.2008, respondent No.1 has passed the present impugned order dated 06.06.2008, cancelling the earlier permission granted by him for cutting 12 Mango trees in the land in question. Aggrieved by the said action of respondent No.1-Tahsildar, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The case of the petitioner is that the impugned order is passed, without issuing any notice and without affording any opportunity of hearing to him, and that the unofficial respondent Nos.2 to 4 are not concerned with the land in question, and that they have no locus standi to question the permission granted to him by respondent No.1 for cutting the mango trees situated in his land. According to the petitioner, subsequent to the permission granted by respondent No.1-Tahsildar, while he was proceeding to cut the trees, when respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein tried to interfere and raised objection for cutting the trees, he filed a civil suit in O.S. No.38 of 2008 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge Court, Zaheerabad, for permanent injunction against them, along with temporary injunction petition, and obtained temporary injunction orders, which are still in force. Hence, the present impugned order passed by respondent No.1, without issuing any notice and without affording any opportunity of hearing, is illegal and arbitrary and the same is liable to be set aside. When the matter is taken up for admission, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue produced the relevant record. A perusal of the record produced by the learned Assistant Government Pleader clearly indicates that based on a complaint made by the unofficial respondent Nos. 2 to 4, respondent No.1-Tahsildar has passed the present impugned order, canceling his earlier permission granted to the petitioner for cutting 12 Mango trees, and before passing the said order, no notice whatsoever was issued to the petitioner. In the circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with the following observations: The impugned order dated 06.06.2008, passed by respondent No.1-Tahsildar is set aside. Respondent No.1-Tahsildar is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation made by respondent Nos. 2 to 4, after issuing notices and after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent Nos.2 to 4, in accordance with law. Till such time, both the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are directed not to cut any trees situated in the land in question. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 17.07.2008 Nsr