THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Writ Petition No.29304 of 2014
Between:
Dated 17th October, 2014
The Ganapavaram Field Labour Cooperative Society And …Petitioner The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by the Principal Secretary, Energy, Forest, Environment, Science and Technology Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Smt.R.Annapurna Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Forests (AP) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioner’s possession of land admeasuring Acs.250.00 in Survey No.285 of Ganapavaram Reserve Forest of Ganapavaram Village, Mylavaram Mandal, Krishna District as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
From a perusal of the record, it is evident that W.P.No.25763 of 2010 filed by the petitioner was disposed of by this Court by order, dated 27.03.2012, inter alia with the following direction:
“In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit fresh proposals to the Government in prescribed format in 8 sets, as required under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 along with necessary documents within 30 days from today, in which event the respondents will process the same for approval of the Central Government. Till finalisation of the proposals or until final order is passed, the respondents may not disturb the petitioner from the subject land.”
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that so far the respondents have not disposed of the petitioner’s application for extension of lease and that they have been trying to interfere with the possession of its members over the land in question.
In my opinion, the petitioner has availed an inappropriate remedy by filing this writ petition. The interests of the petitioner were protected by this Court in the above-mentioned writ petition by directing the respondents not to disturb its members from the subject land till the disposal of its application to be filed before the competent authority. If in violation of this order, the respondents have been causing interference, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file a contempt case. The petitioner cannot be permitted to file successive writ petitions with regard possession over the property.
For the above-mentioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy in the light of the observations made hereinbefore.
As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, interim order, dated 26.09.2014, shall stand vacated and W.P.No.36652 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 17th October, 2014
VGB