K. Veeranna & Anr. v. Divisional Forest Officer, Warangal South Division & Anr.

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.35128 of 2012 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking directions by way of Mandamus, to declare the action of respondent No.2 in seizing Tractors bearing Engine Nos.PY 3029D214206 and PY 3029D70201, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners are owners of aforesaid Tractors and it is stated that they use the same for ploughing purpose. On the ground that the Tractors have entered into forest area unauthorisedly and undertook ploughing in the forest reserve land, a case was registered and the vehicles were seized on 15.10.2012 by the Forest Beat Officer, Madaguda. It is the case of petitioners that accused No.5 in the case registered by the respondents, is given rights over an extent of Ac.5.50 cents of land under the provisions of The Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, and that at his request, they were ploughing the said land, which is covered by compartment Nos.817 and 818 of Beat Madaguda near Puttalabupathi village of Warangal District. During the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that so far, no further proceedings are initiated by the 1st respondent, and for the last about one month, they are deprived of their Tractors, which are being used for ploughing. It is submitted that as they undertook ploughing only in the land held by accused No.5, on whom, rights are conferred under the provisions of The Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, the seizure itself is illegal. On the other hand, on instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the vehicles were used for ploughing the land, which is not covered by the area transferred in favour of accused No.5 under the provisions of The Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, as such, the same would amount to illegal cultivation in the forest area, which is an offence under the provisions of the forest laws. With regard to the said allegations, it is a matter for inquiry by the competent authority after initiation of proceedings under Section 44 of the A.P. Forest Act,

1967. It is not a case where any allegation is made either for cutting or for carrying the forest growth in the tractors belonging to the petitioners. Only on the ground that the vehicles were used for ploughing the land in forest area, they were seized. It is the case of petitioners that for such area, rights are already granted in favour of accused No.5, as such, they have not committed any illegality. Be that as it may. With regard to the allegations made, it is a matter for inquiry, but as much as the vehicles were seized as early as on 15.10.2012 and as confiscation proceedings are yet to be initiated, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to release the Tractors to the petitioners forthwith, on giving an undertaking that they will not use the said vehicles for ploughing in the forest area and that they will not transfer the vehicles nor create any third party interest over the same, till appropriate final orders are passed by the 1st respondent. It is open to the 1st respondent to make an independent inquiry in to the allegations made against the petitioners and pass appropriate final orders. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, WPMP.No.44634 of 2012 stands closed. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 15th November 2012