HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P. No.16246 OF 2010 Dated 2-9-2010 Between: Nupa Veeraiah and others. …Petitioners. And: The Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam (North), Bhadrachalam, Khammam District and others. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P. No.16246 OF 2010 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking mandamus directing the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam (North), Bhadrachalam, Khammam District- 1st respondent to forthwith issue transit permits to the extent of 50% of the felled trees in patta lands of the petitioners as per the orders of the District Collector, Khammam in Rc.No.E1/63/2009 dated 24-1- 2010 and Rc.No.E1/63/2009 dated 2-4-2010 and the orders of the 1st respondent in Rc.No.1889/2001/B7 dated 14-5-2010. 2. The petitioners sought permission for cutting and transport of teak and non-teak trees existing in their patta lands. The matter has been referred to the Sub-Collector Bhadrachalam and the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam for enquiry. Basing on the report of the Sub-Collector, Bhadrachalam, the request of the petitioners was not considered. Aggrieved by the order of rejection, the petitioners filed representations before the Government. Thereupon, the Government considered the representations of the petitioners and permitted them to cut and remove 50% of the trees (teak and non-teak) which are above 120 Cms. girth to meet their urgent family needs subject to the procedure provided under Rule 8 of A.P. Preservation of Private Forests Rules, 1978 and directed the District Collector, Khammam to take further action in the matter. 3. The District Collector under letter dated 2-4-2010 permitted the petitioners for cutting and transportation of the trees existed in the patta land of each of the petitioners subject to the following conditions: (i) The Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam has to identify trees (Teak and non-teak) which are above 120 cms. in girth not exceeding 50% of total available trees which are existing in the patta land of each Ryot as specified in the G.O. cited. (ii) The ryots have to cut themselves such identified trees and keep as a lot, at a safer place which is suitable for inspection by forest officials. (iii) After physical inspection and as per the certificate issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam the ryots can sell the permitted trees under supervision of the Forest Department. 4. The Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam, under proceedings dated 14-5-2010 identified the number of teak and non-teak trees i.e., 50% of the existing trees in the patta lands of the petitioners which are required to be felled. Condition Nos. 16 and 17 of the proceedings dated 14-5-2010 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam reads as hereunder: “The cutting of tree growth and transportation of the material from the spot shall be done under the supervision of Forest Departmental officials and the entire process shall be completed within (6) months (Six months) from the date of issue of felling permission by the District Collector, Khammam and no further extension of time shall be granted under any circumstances.” “Necessary transit permits will be sanctioned on receipt of stock report of felled material along with D.F.L.R. from the Forest Range Officer, Dummugudem, with specific recommendations of Sub-Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam (North) Division.” 5. The petitioners started felling of trees on 5-5-2010 and completed on 10-6-2010. The concerned Forest Officials checked the felled trees on 20-6-2010. The Divisional Forest Officer has to issue transit permits. While so, the petitioners made representation on 8-1-2010 seeking permission to cut all the trees teak and non-teak either small or big existing in their lands. The Government ie.,4th respondent examined the representation of the petitioners and rejected their request by issuing a Memo No.4849/FOR.I (2)/2009 dated 4-6-2010. Relevant portion of the memo reads hereunder: “The attention of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, A.P., Hyderabad, is invited to the references cited. He is informed that the request of Sri Nupa Veeraiah and other 32 ST Farmers to accord permission to cut and transport “all” the trees existing in their patta lands without insisting for rule 8 of Andhra Pradesh Preservation of Private Forest Rules, 1978, is examined and considered that it is not feasible of compliance. The request is accordingly rejected.” 6. The petitioners submitted representations to respondents 1 and 3 seeking permission to lift 50% of the teak already cut pursuant to the permission granted by the authorities. The Divisional Forest Officials under the guise of the memo dated 4-6-2010 has not issued the transit permits even in respect of 50% of the existing trees teak and non teak trees which have been felled down as per the procedure contemplated under Rule 8 of A.P. Preservation of Private Forests Rules, 1978. Hence, this writ petition. 7. When this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader for Forests received notice on behalf of the respondents and filed counter-affidavit. 8. The issuance of permission to the petitioners to cut 50% of the existing teak and non-teak trees in their patta land is not disputed. 9. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that the Government have not agreed to exempt Rule 8 of A.P. Preservation of Private Forests Rules, 1978 and therefore, the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhadrachalam has stopped felling of the trees in the patta lands owned by the petitioners. 10. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Forests appearing for the respondents. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that what is sought for by the petitioners is transit permit with respect to 50% of the teak and non-teak trees which have been cut as per the permission granted to them by the Government in G.O.Rt.No.1 dated 1-1-2010 and orders consequent thereto passed by the District Collector dated 2-4-2010. 12. It is a matter of record that the petitioners sought for permission to cut all the teak and non-teak trees existing in the land. The said permission has been rejected. It does not mean that the permission already granted with regard to 50% of the teak and non-teak trees existing in their lands has been annuled. The orders passed by the Government permitting the petitioners to cut 50% of the teak and non-teak trees existing on their land is in force as on this day since the same has not been superceded. What all required is that felled trees must be in accordance with the procedure laid down in Rule 8 of A.P. Preservation of Private Forests Rules, 1978. The concerned officials identified the number of trees which are permitted to be cut vide Rc.No.1889/2001/B7 dated 14-5-2010. 13. Such is the situation, there cannot be any impediment to the 1st respondent in giving transit permission to the petitioners to lift 50% of the teak and non-teak trees existing in their lands as per G.O.Rt.No.1 dated 1-1-2010 subject to their following the procedure contemplated under Rule 8 of A.P. Preservation of Private Forests Rules, 1978 within four weeks from today. 14. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. __________________________________ Justice B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Date: 2-9-2010. Note: Issue CC in three days. BO Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P. No.16246 OF 2010 Dated 2-9-2010