IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.14652 OF 2008 Between: Pirikiti Chinna Thirupathaiah ..... Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 2 others .....Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.14652 OF 2008 ORDER: This Court ordered notice before admission on 09-07-2008 and counter affidavit had been filed by respondent No.3. 2. The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not safeguarding the poramboke land, which is meant for grazing purpose admeasuring Acs.5-00 in Survey No.72 situated at Padamati Lakshmipuram village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasham District, from the encroachment of third parties as illegal, arbitrary, violative of constitutional provisions and contrary to Section 58 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1956 (for short “the Act”) and consequently direct the respondents to safeguard the said poramboke land which is meant for grazing purpose. 3. It is stated that there is a poramboke land admeasuring Acs.5-00 in Survey No.72 situated at Padamati Lakshmipuram village, Donakonda Mandal, Prakasham District and the same is being used for the purpose of grazing and also for ingress and egress to the hillock area, which is at the top of that land. There is a pond at the bottom of the poramboke land and the petitioner along with the other villagers used to take their cows, cattle, goats etc., to that land and through the same to the hillock area. It is also stated that since time immemorial, the poramboke land is being used for grazing purpose by all the villagers including the petitioner. 4. While the matter stood thus, one Vallabhaneni Subbaiah, who is trying to encroach the poramboke land in collusion with respondent No.3, is stopping the petitioner and the other villagers and the cattle, buffalos, cows and goats etc., from entering into the same. When the villagers protested the same, Subbaiah proclaimed that he purchased the land from respondent No.3 and when they enquired the same with respondent No.3, it is not at all evincing any interest to answer their queries with regard to illegal claim of Subbaiah. It is also stated that in spite of their requests not to allot the land to any third parties, which is being used for grazing purpose by the villagers, it appears, even respondent No.3 is going to issue pahanies in the name of Subbaiah. In these circumstances, the villagers made a representation to the authorities concerned including respondent No.2 requesting to safeguard the land from the encroachment of third parties, so as to protect their cows, cattle from death. Despite the representation, unfortunately, the authorities concerned did not evince any interest to safeguard the land. The authorities, which have to safeguard the poramboke lands, unfortunately, allowing the same to be swallowed by the land grabbers at the cost of the villagers and their livestock. 5. It is further stated that as per Section 58 of the Act, all the grazing grounds are at the disposal of the Government and which are not required by them for any specific purpose shall vest in Gram Panchayat. Therefore, it is the duty of the Gram Panchayat to safeguard the grazing lands. In this case, respondent No.3 Gram Panchayat, which is supposed to safeguard the grazing lands, is hand in glove with Subbaiah, thereby depriving the grazing lands, which are meant for the villagers. This kind of action, on part of the respondents is nothing but illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Act. 6. In the circumstances, the writ petition had been filed. 7. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3, it is stated that the land in Survey No.72, admeasuring Acs.144-50 cents is classified as grazing poramboke and vested with the Gram Panchayat and the same is popularly known as Chandrapalli Gutta. As the land is classified as grazing land, it was entered in the prohibitory order book. The copies of FMB and the extract of prohibitory book have also been placed before this Court for reference. It is also stated that some villagers have occupied some portion of the land and cultivating the same. As there are some illegal occupations over the land, the Gram Panchayat requested the Tahsildar to evict the encroachers under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Accordingly, the Tahsildar issued notices under Section 7 of the A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 to the encroachers and the enquiry is going on. Further, specific stand had been taken stating that it is incorrect to say that the Gram Panchayat is trying to alienate the land in favour of Subbaiah and others, but in fact the encroahcers are said to be evicted by due process of law. 8. Sri Seetharam Chaparla, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner, would submit that inasmuch as in the facts situation, since the authorities are initiating appropriate action, let respondent No.2 look into the grievances of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the representations submitted by the petitioner and the other villagers to it on 25-09-2007 ventilating their grievances. 9. In the light of the above, the Writ Petition is hereby disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation dated 25-09-2007 of the petitioner and other villagers in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ P.S. NARAYANA, J September 11, 2009. PV