IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 16505 OF 2009 Between: K.Satyavathi and another …… petitioners AND The Superintendent of Police,Eluru and others ......Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following:- THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.16505 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the complaint filed by the petitioners on 08.07.2009 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of CPC and violative of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the complaint dated 08.07.2009 for providing necessary protection to the petitioners’ land situated in R.S.No.686/1 an extent of Ac.12.78 cents of Buttaigudem village and Mandal, West Godavari District. The case of the petitioners is that they are the owners and possessors of the land to an extent of Ac.12.78 cents in R.S.No.686/1 of Buttaigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District. The said land was acquired by their husbands during their life time by way of succession i.e., prior to commencement of the A.P.Schedule Area Land Transfer Regulations 1/59 as amended by Regulations 1 of 1970. As the land is situated in Agency Area of West Godvari, the competent authority conducted enquiry under Regulation 1 of 1970 in respect of the said property. After conducting the enquiry, the then Special Deputy Collector (TW) Eluru by an order dated 29.08.1980 concluded that there is no contravention to the regulations. As against the said order no appeal has been filed and the orders of the Special Deputy Collector, Eluru, in S.R.No.75 of 1979 dated 29.08.1980 has become final. It is also submitted by them that in the year 2000 again proceedings were initiated under the Regulations before the Special Deputy collector (Tribal Welfare) K.R.Puram in S.R.No.2058 of 2000. The same was challenged by way of filing a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.17252 of 2002. The said writ petition was allowed and impugned order was set aside by this Court by order dated 10.09.2004. There is an order in their favour with regard to the agricultural land situated in R.S.No.686/1 to an extent of Ac.12.78 cents of Buttaigudem Village and Mandal. It has been practice of the tribes in the Agency Areas of West Godavari interfering with the possession of the non- tribes during the agricultural operations. In this connection, the tribes of Vippalapadu interfering with the possession of the petitioners land and not allowing agriculture operations in the schedule land. Therefore, the petitioners approached the respondents by way of submitting complaint, dated 08.07.2009 for providing necessary protection from the tribes of Vippalapadu village. The Special Assistant Agent/Revenue Divisional Officer, issued a circular stating that if any complaint received by the Police officer with regard to interference of the tribes in the non-tribal lands, first the respondents have to obtain status report from the concerned Tahsildar, then initiate action about the trespass by the tribes in the non-tribes land. Hence, the petitioners approached the Tahsildar to refer the matter to the concerned Station House Officer, Buttaigudem for providing necessary protection against the interference of the tribes, during the agricultural operations. It is also submitted that the complaint of the petitioners received by the respondents on 08.07.2009 and no action has been taken so far. Hence, the present writ petition. The learned Government pleader for Home, based on the instructions received from the Station House Officer, submitted that the Police, Buttaigudem addressed a letter to the Tahsildar, Buttaigudem on 16.08.2009 to provide information and legal status of the land in Survey No.686/1 of Buttaigudem village. As per the instructions of the Tahsildar, the Village Revenue Officer, Buttaigudem submitted his report that the Tahsildar, Buttaigudem Mandal allotted the land in Survey No.686/1 at Buttaigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District to seven persons total in an extent of Acs.7.00 vide Rc.No.30/2001 and patta pass books were also handed over to the said seven beneficiaries. It is also submitted that the husband of the 2nd petitioner, Ramesh, sold the land to an extent of Ac.1.00 in Sy.No.686/1 to one Kangala Ramu, R/o Veppalapadu village, Buttaigudem Mandal, West Godavari District. It is also submitted that the petitioners are in possession of land to an extent of Acs.4.78 cents in Survey No.686/1 situated at Buttaigudem Village and Mandal, West Godavari District without any interruption. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. The main grievance of the petitioners is that though they are the owners and possessor of the land mentioned hereinabove, during the agricultural operations, the tribes are interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners. In this regard, the petitioners lodged a complaint before the Police, but they did not take any action on the said complaint, so far. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader submitted that based on the complaint lodged by the petitioners, the respondents have enquired into the matter and addressed a letter to the Tahsildar, Buttaigudem and obtained the information that the Tahsildar, Buttaigudem Mandal allotted the land in Survey No.686/1 to seven persons total in an extent of Acs.7.00 vide Rc.No.30/2001 and patta pass books were also handed over to the said beneficiaries. It is also submitted that the husband of the 2nd petitioner sold the land to an extent of Ac.1.00 in Survey No.686/1 to one Kangala Ramu, R/o.Veppalapadu Village, Buttaigudem Mandal, West Godavari District and the petitioners are in possession of land to an extent of Acs.4.78 cents in Survey No.686/1 of the said village and district, without any interruption. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel, the 2nd respondent had taken appropriate action and found that the petitioners are in the possession of the land to an extent of Acs.4.78 cents as against the land to an extent of Ac.12.78 cents. Therefore, it cannot be said that the 2nd respondent had not taken any action on the complaint lodged by the petitioners. However, it is open for the petitioners to approach the appropriate authorities for taking necessary action, in accordance with law, in respect of any claim of the petitioners with regard to the land, which is not in their possession. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, at the threshold. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH September 22, 2009. IVD/LSK