C.Suryanarayana Raju 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 particularly one in the nature of a Writ of l\ilandamus declaring the action of 6th Respondent in issuing impugned Revised Recovery Orders in Proc.No.FORltil-V12024-251K3, dated 15.O5.2025 ordering for recovery of an amount of Rs.20,29,8731 (Rupees Twenty Lakh Twenty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy Three Only) from the pay of petitioner in (150) installments.at Rs.'13,533/- per month from the month of May, 2025 onwards as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutio na l, against the principles of natural justice and set aside the same. IA NO: 1 OF 2025 PetitionUnderSectionl5lcPCprayingthatinthecirctlmstancesStatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to STAY all further proceedings for a period of 6 to 9 months pursuant to the issuance of impugned Revised Recovery orders in Proc.No. F()RlVl -v 12024-251K3' dated 15.05.2025 issued by the 6th Respondent to facilitate tlre petitioner to trace the records in the Range Offices and Government Timber Depot pertaining to the seized material, pending disposal of the above writ petition' Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI GUNDRATI RAMAN GOUD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON ,BLE SRI JUSTIC EN MAVARAPU RAJES WAR RAO WRIT PETITIO N o.15505 0F 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of respondent No.6 in issuing the Revised Recovery proceedings vide proc. No. FORM-V/2024-25/K3, dated 15.05.2025, directing recovery of an amount of Rs.20,29,873/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Twenty-Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Seventy-Three only) from the salary of the petitioner in 150 monthly instalments of Rs.13,533/- each, commencing from May 2025, as being arbitrary, i egal, and violative of principles of natural justice.

2. Heard Sri Gundrati Raman Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government pleader for Services-I for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

3. The case of the petitioner is that while discharging duties as Forest Beat Officer in Khanapur and Kaddam Ranges, he booked various forest offence cases, including both detected and undetected ofFences, and issued Preliminary Offence Reports (pORs) accordingly. As per departmental practice and the Telangana Forest Offences, Compounding and Prosecution Rules, 1969, the procedure for seizure, custody, and transportation oF forest produce is well defined. In the case oF Undetected Offence Reports (UDORs), where - 2 the offenders could not be traced, the seized timber was required to be transported to the Government rimber Depot (GTD) under varid permit and invoice. It is stated that the role of th€ petitioner was limited to issuing poRs and ensuring safe custodi, of the seized timber, whereas the responsibility of issuing permits and supervising transportation to the GTD lies with the Forest Section Officer or Forester.

4. It is further the case of the petitioner that re:;pondent No.6, vide proceedings No.FORM-V /2024-25/K3 dated 15.05.2025, issued revised recovery orders directing recovery of an amount of Rs.20,29,873/- from the petitioner's salary in 150 instalments of Rs.13,533/- per month commencing from May 2025. The said recovery was based on reports submitted by the Forest Range Officers of Khanapur and Kaddam Ranges, allegring that the petitioner failed to transport timber in certain poR/UDoR cases, involving 1219 logs valued at 87.44 cmt, Ieading tc) pendency of files and financiar ross to the Government. The petitiorer contended that due to long-standing administrative lapses, shortage oF ministerial staff, and improper record maintenance dating back to 2008, such discrepancies occurred, and that he cannot be held solely responsibre. He further submitted that he has since traced certain timber invoices and records confirming that timber was indeed transported to GTD Khanapur and acknowledged by the Forester concerned. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the J present writ Petition

5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents, placed on record a copy of the written instructions and the relevant portion of the said written instructions reads as under: "Further, it is submitted that almost eight months'time was given to the petitioner to transport the felled timber in his custody, as per FORM-V. However, he did not utilize this opportunity. Hence, there is no need to grant the petitioner an additional 6 to 9 months for this issue. "

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to clear all the issues related to the transportation of timber as per FORM-V within a period of I I four months. However, he seeks the cooperation of the respondent authorities in providing the necessary records to facilitate the finalization of the said issue.

7. In view of the above submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner shall be granted four months' time to complete the verification and reconciliation process pertaining to the transportation of seized timber and the Form-V records. The respondent authorities are directed to cooperate with the petitioner and provide necessary access to records and assistance 4 \ for finalizing the issue. It is made clear that if the pL.titioner fails to complete the process within the said four months, the respondents are at liberty to initiate appropriate steps for recover'/ in accordance with law. If recovery has not already commenced, it shall be kept in abeyance till 31.10.2025, and shall commence fronr 01.11.2025, in case, the petitioner has not complied the order of this Court.

8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition rs disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall sternd closed ,TRUE COPYII SD/- A. SRINIVASA REDDY SI$TANT REGISTRAR \:.: ISECTlON OFFICER -.- To,

1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Environme Forests, Science and Technology Department, State of Telangana, Secretaria- , Hyderabad - 500 022

2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, and Head of the Forest Force (HoFF), Telangana, Aranya Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad - 500 004

3. The Conservator of Forests, Basara Circle, Nirmal 4. The Field Director Project Tiger, Kawal Tiger Reserve, M;lncherial - 504 2Og 5. The District Forest Officer, Nirmal District, Nirmal - 504 1t)6 6. The Forest Divisional Officer, Khanapur, Nirmal District - l;042O3 7. One CC to SRI GUNDRATI RAMAN GOUD, Advocate [CrpUC] B. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES l, High Court for the State of Telangana.

9. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP HIGH COURT DATED:1 910612025 -/a -- ./.1.. t,' : SI re '1, ,9 ? t ORDER WP.No.16506 of 2025 Dr (<\ 25 "uru 2n5 ,.o ,lr t.i./ t. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I e Itr