IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No : 15292 of 1997 & 10484 of 1998 W.P.No.15292 of 1997 Between: Gurlinka Ammiraju and others. . .Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents W.P.No.10484 of 1998 Between: Akula Veerayya and others. . .Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.15292 of 1997 & 10484 of 1998 COMMON ORDER : These two writ petitions raise common questions and hence, they are dealt with together. The issue involved in both these writ petitions center around the action of the State and its officials in proposing to recover an amount of compensation paid to the writ petitioners towards loss of coconut trees sustained by them during the cyclone that battered the coastal Andhra Pradesh on 06.11.1996. 2) The facts, which are relevant, are in narrow compass: The writ petitioners are all residents of Nagavaram village in Uppalagupta Mandal, East Godavari District. An unprecedented hurricane/cyclone hit the coastal District East Godavari on 06.11.1996. The gales have literally uprooted the coconut trees and in some cases, the crown of the trees has been twisted rendering the tree useless. As a result of this damage, the farmers had to remove all the uprooted coconut trees and also remove such trees whose crown has been twisted around. They had to replant the coconut saplings in the place of uprooted and damaged trees. Thus large sections of society have been ruined beyond redemption. With a view to provide some succor to those farmers, the State government has announced, as a welfare measure, compensation to be paid at the rate of Rs.150/- per every uprooted coconut tree and Rs.50/- per every tree whose crown has been twisted. The local village servants and revenue officials have been involved in the matter of identification and enumeration of the number of trees that were either uprooted or damaged due to cyclonic effect. Based upon the total number of trees so damaged, calculations have been made and the individuals have been paid compensation amounts at the rate of Rs.150/- or Rs.50/- as the case may be. This itself, according to the writ petitioners, is hardly sufficient to meet the expenditure involved in removing the coconut trees that have fallen in the plantations. Each coconut tree, which is well grown, weighs heavily. Therefore, manual labour has got to be engaged firstly for their removal from the plantation site and then taking them away to a convenient place, where they can be destroyed. 3) While matters stood thus, entertaining suspicion that in the matter of payment of compensation certain irregularities have taken place, particularly by way of inflation of the number of trees in the respective fields belonging to the petitioners, the impugned orders have passed proposing to recover some portion of the amount which has been paid to the writ petitioners as a measure of compensation for the loss sustained during the cyclonic storm. It is the case of the respondents that when they got verified the data and particulars, they had reason to believe that the number of trees said to have been got uprooted or twisted was inflated to secure compensation amount additionally. Unfortunately, there is no concrete material available for one to come to such a conclusion though the learned Government Pleader for Revenue has opposed this writ petition contending that in the matter of payment of compensation which is purely flowing from out of the grace of the government, when abuses are noticed, the State is bound to recover the same. He would plead that welfare measures announced by the State are intended to secure help to the needy and genuine victims. It is not intended to purely compensate them. It is only a measure undertaken to enable the farmers who have been badly damaged by vagaries of the nature, to a certain extent. The state has undertaken this measure as a goodwill measure which is not expected to be abused or misused by the beneficiaries. When such information has percolated to the revenue administration, they sought to recover the amounts by passing the impugned order. The learned Government Pleader also disclosed the names of the members from whom the amounts are to be recovered with reference to the material available in the government record. But, however, the record itself is not in a position to firmly disclose as to the correctness or genuineness of the information collected by the revenue administration with regard to the inflation said to have been admitted by the beneficiaries. Entire question centers around the fact as to whether the facts and figures mentioned by the individual beneficiaries are true, correct or inflated. When once the trees have all been either removed from the plantation site or destroyed, there would hardly be any evidence available for one to say, with any degree of authority and certainty that the figures have been inflated. For want of adequate material, available with the respondents, based upon which, alone the claims of the writ petitioners can be said to be inaccurate, the action of the Respondents becomes unsustainable. 4) I do not consider these cases as fit cases to allow the State to attempt to recover the meager amounts of compensation paid to the petitioners. I, therefore, direct the respondents not to make any recoveries pursuant to the impugned order from the writ petitioners. There is no justification in proposing to recover the meager amounts of compensation paid, in the absence of positive and firm material to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that the facts and figures furnished by the individual beneficiaries are all inflated. 5) Therefore, both these Writ Petitions stand allowed, but however, without costs. _____________________________ JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO December 01, 2009 KSH