IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13391 of 2011 Between: Podium Laxmaiah & others. … Petitioners And The District Level Committee under the Scheduled Tribes & other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, Khammam District & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P.V. Ramana Counsel for respondents 1-3&5: AGP for Forests Counsel for respondent No.4: AGP for Revenue This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13391 of 2011 ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not implementing the pattas granted under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (for short, “the Act”) in respect of Ac.3.31 cents, Ac.5.07 cents, Ac.9.75 cents, Ac.3.44 cents, Ac.5.06 cents and Ac.5.22 cents in compartment No.65 of Pedamidisileru Block, R.Kothagudem Forest Beat, Dummugudem Range, Bodanelli Section of Bhadrachalam North Division, Khammam District, as illegal and arbitrary. The grievance of the petitioners in this Writ Petition is that even though pattas under the Act were granted, on account of failure of the respondents to properly demarcate the boundaries, third parties are interfering with the possession and enjoyment of their lands. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3, it is inter alia stated that there are serious disputes between the petitioners on the one side and other villagers of Sunnamvari Gumpu of R.Kothagudem Gram Panchayat on the other side in respect of possession of the lands covered by the pattas granted by the respondents and that the respondents have nothing to do with the said disputes. It is further stated that the respondents have already discharged their statutory obligation by granting pattas and that it is for the petitioners to protect their possession from the alleged interference of private persons by approaching the competent civil Court. I find force in the stand taken by the respondents, because if the private persons invade the petitioners’ rights, they shall be free to approach the competent civil Court in order to protect their rights. As the respondents have not indulged in violation of any of the rights of the petitioners or failed to carryout their statutory obligation, no mandamus can be issued as prayed for by the petitioners. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy to protect their possession from undue interference by third parties. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.16243 of 2011 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 27.08.2011 ES Note:- Issue cc in one week. ES