The High Court · 2025

Petition under A(icle 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 Mandamus declaring the action of 6th Respondent in issuing impugned Revised Recovery Orders ordering for recovery of an amount of Rs.'10,21,584/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Twenty One Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four Only) from the pay of .petitioner in (96) instalments at Rs.10,6421- per month from the month of May, 2025 onwards as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, against the principles of naturaljustice and set aside the same. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circ;umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to srAY all further proceedings for a period of 6 to 9 months pursuant to the issuance of impugned Revised Recovery orders in proc.No.FoRI,/ -vt2o24-2slK3, dated '1 5.05.2025 issued by the 6th Respondent to facilitate ilre 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 cUNDRAT| RAMAN GOUD Counsel forthe Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER THEH o N ,BL E SRI ]USTICE NAM AVARAPU RAJESH WAR RAO 1 WRIT PETITION o.16657 0 F 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of respondent No.6 in issuing the Revised Recovery proceedings vide Proc. N o. FO RM -V / 2024 -25 / K3, dated t5.O 5.2025, directi n g recovery of an amount of Rs.10,2L,584/- (Rupees Ten Lakh Twenty One Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Four only) from the salary of the petitioner in 96 monthly instalments of Rs.lO,642/- each, commencing from May 2025, as being arbitrary, illegal, 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 his duties as Forest Beat Officer in Khanapuram and Kaddam Ranges, he booked several forest offence cases including both detected (Offence Reports - ORs) and undetected offences (Undetected Offence Reports - UDORs) and issued preliminary Offence Reports (PORs) accordingly. As per departmental procedure and the Telangana Forest Offences, Compounding and prosecution Rules, 1969, in undetected cases where offenders are not identified, the J \ 2 seized timber is to be transported to the Government Timber Depot (GTD) under valid permit and invoice. The petitioner's role is limited to issuing PORs and ensuring custody of the timber', while it is the responsibility of the Forest Section Officer or Forester to issue the transit permit and oversee transportation. Holvever, due to shortage of ministerial staff for over two decades, thre timber return records in Form-V were not properly maintained, and the petitioner is being wrongly held responsible for long-pending timber entries caused by administrative lapses beyond his control. As .per the Telangana Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1970, such timber must be moved to GTD with Forest Permit in Form-II, and the depot Forester must acknowledge receipt based on log-wise details in the invoice.

4. It is further submitted that respondent No.6/Forest Divisional Officer issued revised recovery orders vide proceedings No.FORM- V/2024-25/K3 dated 15.05.2025 directing recovery of Rs.10,21,584/- from the petitioner's salary in 96 instalments of Rs.LO,642/- per month, alleging failure to transport timber in certain POR/UDOR cases covering 526 logs (:50.845 cmt). The petitioner submits that the records pertain to the year 2008 and earlier, and after receiving the impugned proceedings, he made efrorts to trace invoices and has already identified specific pORs showing timber was transported to GTD, Khanapur and received by the Forester, including POR No.4t77/t6B dated 21.01.2013 / 3 (76 logs) and POR No.219UBB dated 21.05.2072 (7 logs). He intends to verify the remaining records from October 2025 onwards due to current monsoon work pressure. The petitioner, being a low-paid employee, would suffer irreparable financial hardship if the impugned recovery is enforced without granting time for full verification. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the 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 t four months. However, he seeks the cooperation of the respondent authorities in providing the necessary records to facilitate the finalization of the said issue. -\l\ 4

7. In view of the above submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner shall be granted four months,tire 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 for finalizing the issue. It is made clear that if the pr:titioner fails to complete the process within the said four months, the respondents are at liberty to initiate appropriate steps for recover,y' in accordance with law. If recovery has not already commenced, it shall be kept in abeyance till 31.10.2025, and shall commence from OL.lt.2O2S, in case, the petitioner has not complied the order of this Court.

8. With the above directions, this Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Mlscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/-MOHD. ISMAIL EPUry REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER IP \ ..j To,

1. The. Principal secretary to Government, Environment, F:orests, Science and Technology Department, Secretariat, State of fetarigana,--l-lyd"db; sOb o22.

2. The_Principal chief conservator of Forests, and Head of the Forest Force (HoFF) Telangana, Aranya Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad 500 004

3. The District Forest Officer, Nirmal District, Nirmal 504 106 4- The Field Director Project riger, Kawar riger Reserve, M;rncheriar - so4 2oB 5. The Forest Divisional Officer, Khanapur, Nirmal District _ a;O42O3 6. The Forest Range Officer, Kaddam Range, Khanapur, Nirmal District 7. One CC to SRI GUNDRAT| RAMAN GOUD, Advocate. [CpUC] B. Two CCs to GP FOR FORESTS, High court for the rltate of relangana.

9. Two CD Copies. HIGH COURT DATED:19 10612025 ofl THt. Sp4

14. ,J o "t t 2 5 ,.ltl 2p5 (n ( a. Dr.. :-z', ORDER WP.No.16657 oI 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I 6lu-