Gugloth Jabbal Lal v. The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing a confiscation order of the tractor of the petitioner bearing No. TS 17 T 7472 of MF 9500 Tractor and not releasing the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent No.S to see that the land had been given as Podu Patta to the said Bhukya Sunitha and therefore no offence is made out against the petitioner herein and hence set aside the impugned order confiscating of the vehicle. |.A.NO:1 OF 2026 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4th and Sth respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner bearing No. TS 17 T 7472 of MF9500 Tractor make on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case as othenrise the petitioner would be put to great loss and suffering. Counselfor the Petitioner : SRI K.ANANTHA RAO Counselfor the Respondents : AGP FOR FORESTS The Court made the following ORDER I I t 'r' l IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.58O9 OF 2026 DATE: O3.O3.2O26 Between : Gugloth Jabbal Lal And The State of Telangana, Forest Department, Hyderabad & 4 others ORDER: Petitioner Respondents Heard Sri K. Anantha Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forest appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 5,

#2. The oetitioner aoDroache this Court seekino the praver as under: "...to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing a confiscation order of the tractor of the petitioner bearing No.TS L7 T 7472 of MF 9500 Tractor and not releasing the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent No.5 to see that the land had been given as Podu Patta to the said Bhukya Sunitha and therefore no offence is made out against the * t* J'tJ 2 SN,J wP 5809 2026 petitioner herein and hence set aside the impugned order confi:;cating of the vehicle and pass such other order ...,. 3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner had purchased an MF 95OO tractor bearing No. TS U T 7472 in the year 2020 under the prime Minister Self_Employment Scheme ;rnd has been earning livelihood by providing hire services. On 22.03.2021, the Forest Range Officer summoned the petitioner arong with petitioner's tractor and seized the same, alleging that it had been used for ploughing land in Sy.No.38Il of Ankireddypally Thanda belonging to Smt. Bhukya Sunitha and that it was involved in a forest offence. subsequently, confiscation proceedings were initiated under Sections 44(2-8) and 44(2-C) of the Telangana Forest Act, culminating in an order dated 04.08.2022 confiscating the vehicle without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Earlier, in W.p. No.24318 of 202L, this Hon, ble Court directed release of the vehicle subject to deposit of Rs.2,00,000/-, which the petitioner was unable to comply with due to firranciar hardship. Hence, the petitioner has fired the present writ petition seeking to set aside the confiscation order and for interim release of the vehicle. 4 PERUSED THE RECoRD:- a J SN,J wP 5809 2026 (A) The relevant portion of the order impugned

#4. Order: For all the reasons mentioned above, and as per the powers vested to me under section 44 (2) of T.S. Forest Act, L967, I hereby order for confiscation of the vehicles Tractor bearing Nos. T5L7T7472, TS17T3596, TSL7C7L96 and TSL7T34}4 fitted with front blade and rear plough along with the forest produce i.€., 25 cartloads of firewood value @ Rs.622/- per cart load, total destruction value of Rs.15550/- to the Government as it was involved in commission of forest offence i.€., Trespass into Reserve Forest, Attempt of Encroachment in R.F. land to an extent of 3.89 Ha and 5.636 Ha for cultivation purpose by way of ploughing of R.F land, Uprooted and removed the Forest Produce 25 Cart loads fire wood value @ 6221- per cart load value of Rs.15550/- and damaged 500 No's of Staggered Trenches of Value Rs.1,50,000/- Total Value of destruction is Rs.1,65,550/'. An appeal against this order lies before the Chief Conservator of Forests, Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad / District court, Nizamabad within (30) days from the date of receipt of this order as per sub-section (2-D & 2-E) of section 44 of T.s. Forest Act, L967." (B) The averments made by the oetitioner at para 9 4 SN,J wP 5809 2026 *9. I the petitioner herein begi to submit that the 4th had initiated proceedings for confiscation of the respondent vehicle under Section 44(2-8) & 44(2-C) of the Telangana Forest Act and without following any principles of natural justice and the procedure laid down under the sections and without giving any opportunity to defend the petitioner the proceedings weie concluded in passing of the order of the proceedings bearing No.1016-1/2021156 dt.04.08.2022 confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner tractor by saying in the order that the petitioner had accepted their guilt of entering into the forest area. The said order though said to have been made in the year 2022 the same was not communicated to the petitioner who remained innocent as to what is the proceeding against him. The said confiscation order was passed with a clause that the petitioner could prefer ar appeal against the same within 30 days. The order was not brought to the knowledge of the petitioner and was not given an opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry and everything had been done behind his back in total violation of the rules.,, DIscusSION AND coN LUS N: 5 r u n h itionermainlv puts forth the llowino ubm tsslo s: The order impugned dated 04.08.2022 is illegal since it has been passed behind the back of the petitioner without notice. (ii) The petitioner had no knowledge about the passing of the impugned order dated 04.08.2 022 by the 4th repsondent confiscating petitioner,s Tractor bearing No. T517T7472. ,/, ) SN,J wP 5809 2026 (iii) The confiscation order is contrary to the procedure i established under the statute. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.

#6. (i) The order impugned dated 04.08.2022 is legal and as per law. (ii) Though the order impugned dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Forest Divisional Officer, Kamareddy, clearly indicates that an appeal against this order lies before the Chief Conservator of Forests, Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad / District Court, Nizamabad, within (30) days from the date of receipt of the said order as per sub-section (2-D & 2-E) of Section 44 of T.S. Forest Act, !967, yet the petitioner failed to avail the remedy of preferring an apPeal. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.

#7. A bare perusal of the averments made at para'9'of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ 6 , SN,J I. wP-5809 2026 petition clearly indicates that a specific plea is taken by the petitioner herein that the order impugned dated 04.0g.2022 passed in the year 2022 had not been communicated to the petitioner and the petitioner had been unaware oF the proceedings issued against the petitioner. Further the petitioner was not given an opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry and th; rt the proceedings were conducted in violation of the statutory procedure and rules.

#8. The tearned Assistant Government pleader contends that the writ petitaon could be disposed of by directing the petitioner to avaal the statutory remedy of appeal as indicated, in the impugned order dated O4.Og .2,,22tof the proceedings of the Forest Divisional Officer, Kamareddy, pertaining to the confiscation of the vehictes bearing Nos. TSI7T7 47 2, TS 1 7T3596, TS t7 C7 tg 6and TS I 7T3494. 9. The learned counset appearing on behatf of the petitioner does not daspute the said submissions made by the learned Assistant Government pleader for Forests appearing on behalf of the respondents. 1 i 7 SN,J wP 5809 2026

#10. This Court takes note of the fact that the order of confiscation proceedings of the vehicles bearing Nos. TSI7T7474 T517T3596, TSL7C7196 and TS17T3494 are ,l O8.2O22 and therefore the relief as sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition cannot be granted at this stage. However, duly considering the averments made at para '9' of the affidavit filed by the petitioner (referred to and extracted above), this Court opines that petitioner should be given an opportunity to avail the statutory remedy of appeal. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the and upon consent of both the learned counsel on record, the present writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order impugned dated O4.O8.2O22 of the Forest Divisional Kamareddy passed under Section 44 (2) of T.S. \ , Forest Act, 1967 pertaining to order of confiscation of the veh ictes bea ri n g Nos. TS 1 7T7 47 2, TSL7T359 q TSLT C7 L96 and TS17T3494, within two (O2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and upon the petitioner preferring the said appeal before the Chief Conservator of Nizamabad Circte, Nizamabad, the appellate , 8 SN,J.. wP 5809 2026 authority shall consider the said appeal, in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders in conformity wath the principles of natural justice by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner duly taking into consideration the relevant rules. It is also open to the petitioner to file an application seeking immediate release of the vehicles and the appellate Authority is directed to consader the same on merits and pass appropriate orders, in accordance to Iaw, expeditiously, pendang final adjudication and disposal of the appeal on merits by the 2nd respondent in accordance to law. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE Sd/.K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFF]CER To &r'l I t C.C TODAY HIGH COURT DATED i0310312026 I iii: $ (' 1 5 PA B ?nq () &o * ORDER WP.No.5809 ot 2A26 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. 0t,} u> {3u