logo

Requirements

Get Adobe Flash player


AN ESSENTIAL GUIDE ON THE UTILIZATION OF THE GODAVARI WATERS AND RESOURCES


 The RoFR act recognizes the dwelling site, religious places, burial grounds, village council sites along with places of MFP, water resources, biodiverisity etc and also PVT tenures. As the implementation boils down to title deeds for house sites and lands under cultivation, SAKTI engaged the Chenchu youth to document their traditional knowledge in their idiom and dialect, in encouraging them to assert as inborn foresters, capable of managing these resources as envisaged in the Act.


"Since SAKTI activities are mostly issue based and covering a large area, here we concentrate on the forest-related programmes of SAKTI for the present study."


  

The Tribal Struggle for Property Rights

-Arun Kumar


SAKTI: Review Report by: Mukta Srivastava, Programme Officer, Oxfam GB in India - Hyderabad . DATE : 20-25 November 2002

 


RECONSTRUCTING A HISTORY OF LAND,

DISPOSSESSION OF ADIVASI LAND IN THE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT OF A.P.

Bhukya Bhangya

Asst. Professor of History

Nizam College,

Osmania University,

Hyderabad

Read full article


 

 SNO Writ Petition Number 
 1   W. P. M. P. No. 16662 OF 2001
 Contempt case No.1381 of 1997
 WP No..14974 of 1995
 WPNo.14896 of 2000
 WRIT PETITION No. 14974 of 1995
 WRIT PETITION NO.22366 OF 1996
 WRIT PETITION NO: 14896 OF 2000
8 WRIT PETITION NO. 15132 OF 1999
WRIT PETITION NO.22366 OF 1996
10  WRIT PETITION NO: 14896 OF 2000
11  WRIT PETITION NO:2714 OF 2000
12  Writ Appeal No.1011 of 1997
13 WRIT PETITION No. 3263 OF 1988
14 WRIT PETITION No. 3264 OF 1988
15 WRIT PETITION No. 2547 OF 1988
16 WRIT PETITION No. 3266 of 1988
17 WRIT PETITION No. 3267 of 1988
18 CT & prayer W.P.No.22366 of 1996
19 WRIT PETITION NOS: 13373 OF 2001 AND 18141 OF 2001
20 WPMPNo.16662 OF 2001
21 WP NO. 21692 of 1999

S.No./ W.P.No.

Petitioner Vs Respondent

Relief sought / Relief Granted

Filing/ Direction/

Follow-up

1 .

W.P.No.

2547/1988

 

Memo No.761/F2/83-2 dt.3.7.84

S.R.A.No.s

69/78

71/78

72/78

73/78

74/78

S.R.No.s

6/78

8/78

9/78

10/78

12/78

 

A.R.R.

Peethala.Latchanna(non-tribal)

Vs

•  Govt. of A.P. rep.by its Secretary SW Dept.

•  Agent to govt. of AP

•  (Dist.Collector, W.G.)

•  Spl.Dy.Collector TW

•  Spl.Dy.Tahsildar, TW

•  Kunja Pentayya (Tribal)

•  P.Mahalakshmamma(Tribal)

Brief Note: Peethala latchanna is a non-tribal. The SDC and Agent to govt. passed orders to evict him from the land and restore it to the tribals and he filed revision petition which is dismissed on 3.7.84. He filed a writ petition in High Court in 1988 challenging the dismissal of his petition by secretary tribal welfare. On 22-12-98 the high court remanded the case to the Secretary Tribal Welfare for fresh consideration has his revision petition was dismissed without issuing notice.

 

Relief Sought: To quash the orders of respondents 1 to 3 directing ejectment of the petitioner from the lands.

***

Relief Granted: " The matter is remitted for fresh consideration by the govt. in accordance with law. An appropriate decision in this regard shall be taken by the govt. within ten weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving reasonable opportunity to both the parties. It is rather surprising to notice as to why the govt. should keep the revision applications pending for a period of about nine years particularly in matters arising under Land Transfer Regulations. The interest of the tribals is invariably involved in such mattes requiring speedy and expeditious disposal. It would be appropriate that the govt. should dispose of the revision petitions as expeditiously as possible preferably within a short time after admission of the revision petitions by calling for records from the concerned authorities. In a given case, the delay on the part of the respondents even adversely affects the public interest. The govt. is expected to keep the observations in mind while considering and disposing of the revision petitions arising under land transfer regulations. The writ petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Order

 

 

Disposed On : 22-Dec-1998

 

 

Direction on 22-12-1998

Tribals are in possession in land

120 acres

Yepulapadu

2.

WPNo.

3263/88

 

S.R.A.No.s

Same as above

 

S.R.No.s

Same as above

Peethala.Lachanna

Vs

1.1to4 same as above

5.Kunja Bhemaiah(Tribal)

6.P.Venkanna (Tribal)

-do-

Order

3.

WPNo.

3264/88

 

S.R.A.No.s

Same as above

 

S.R.No.s

Same as above

P.Latchanna

Vs.

1 to 4 same as above

5. M.Seethayya (tribal)

6. P.Venkanna(Tribal)

-do-

direction on 22-12-98

Disposed On : 22-Dec-1998

 

Order

4.

W.P.No.

3265/88

 

Memo No.758/F2/93

Dt.16.4.97

S.R.A.No.s

Same as above

 

S.R.No.s

Same as above

P.Latchanna

Vs

1 to 4 same as above

5. M.Mutyalu (tribal)

6. P.Venkanna(tribal

-do-

-do-

5.

W.P.No.

3266/88

 

S.R.A.No.s

Same as above

 

S.R.No.s

Same as above

P.Latchanna

Vs

1 to 4 same as above

•  M.Ramulu

•  P.Venkanna(died)

•  P.Ramamma

•  P.Venkatesh

•  P.Yedukondalu

-do-

Order

6.

W.P.No.

3267/88

 

S.R.A.No.s

Same as above

 

S.R.No.s

Same as above

P.Lachanna

Vs

1 to 4 same as above

5.Madivi ChinaJogaiah

 

-do-

Order

7.

R.P.No.

1538/82

 

S.R.A. No. 10/77 dated 30-11-81

 

S.R. No. 23/77 dated 27-8-77

 

 

A.R.R.

1.G.Satyanarayana(Nontribal)

2.K.Dorabbayi (N.T.)

3.G.Ramana (N.T.)

4.A.Ayyanna(N.T)

Vs

1.Paloji Bhudevi (Tribal)

2.Paloji Chellayamma(Tribal)

 

Brief Note: The Special Deputy Collector and Agent to the Govt. Passed orders to evict the non-tribals and restore the land to the tribal ladies Poloju Bhudevi and Poloju Challayamma.

The non-tribals preferred appeal before Secretary Tribal Welfare, Hyderabad :

 

Relief Sought: The order of the Agent to Govt. W.G district at Eluru in S.R.A.No.10/77 dt. 30-11-1981 confirming the order of the Spl. Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare in S.R.No.23/77 dt, 27-8-77 may be set aside.

That the order of eviction passed against the petitioners in respect of Ac.9-00 cents of land in Chenchugudem village in R.S.No.23/77 dt.27-8-77 on the file of Spl Deputy Collector,Tribal Welfare, Eluru as confirmed in S.R.A No. 10/77 dt.30-11-81 on the file of the Agent to Govt. W.G, Eluru may be suspended

That the documents filed herewith may be received as additional evidence on behalf of the petitioners in this Revision petition.

The case is pending still.

 

 

 

 

Filed on 11-3-82

 

 

 

Disposed land restored to tribals.

 

8.

WA 1467/88 in

WP 2654/83

 

S.R.A.No. 53/78 dated 5-2-83

 

S.R.No. 95/77 dated 19-6-1978

1.Gudelli Ramanna (died)

2.Achanta Ayyanna

3.Kuchipudi Dorabbayi(LRs)

Vs

•  Agent to Govt. W.G.Eluru

•  The Spl.Deputy Collector T.W.Eluru

•  The Tahasildar W.G

•  Kovvasu Mahalaxmi

Brief Note: This land belongs to father of Kovvasu Mahalakshmi. He acquired it by Podu cultivation. After his death the non-tribals taken on lease from Mahalakshmi family and sold away the same to another non-tribal. She filed the petition under LTRP and got order in favour. Non tribal prefer an appeal before agent to government the appeal, which was also dismissed. His writ petition 2654/83 was dismissed, on that he prefer a writ appeal.

Relief Sought: The order of eviction against the petitioners is illegal and void

 

 

legal aid provided by I.T.D.A.

Filed on 22-9-88

 

 

Disposed On : 14-Mar-1996

9.

R.P.No.

909/F1-/85-1

Parimi Gangaraju (NT)

Vs

1.Agent to Govt. W.G. Eluru

2.Spl.Deputy Collector

3.Smt.P.Bhudevi

4.Smt.P.Chellamma

Relief Sought: The records in the case may be called for and examined and after giving a hearing opportunity to the petitioner and his counsel to make the submissions and the Govt. may be pleased to stay all further proceedings of the petitioner.

Filed on 30-8-85.

Disposed off in favour of tribals.

10.

W.P. No. 12770/2001

 

S.R. No. 4/98 on the file of Settlement Officer, Kovvuru

Parimi Somaraju

Vs

•  Agent to Govt. / District Collector, W. G. Dt., Eluru

•  The special Deputy Collector (TW), K.R. Puram., W.G.Dist.

•  Settlement Officer (RDO), Kovvur, W.G. dt.

•  Dadi Venkateshwara Rao

Relief Sought: Prohibit the third respondent to entertain the claim filed by the 4 th respondent in S. R. No. 4/98 on the file of Settlement Officer (RDO), Kovvur, W. G. District

 

Relief granted: The third respondent shall consider and decide the same within a period of six months, dated 8-8-2001

 

Pending in Settlement Officer court

Disposed On : 29-Aug-2001

11.

W.A.1723/89

In

W.P.No

9536/87

SRA23/86

Parimi Ganga raju

and others

Vs

 

Relief Granted : Writ Appeal dismissed

 

 

(Ref: Advocate's letter)

dismissed on 21-9-95.

12.

 

W.A.1729/89 in

WAMP 39/95

A.R.R.

Poloju Bhudevi

Vs

P.Ganga raju

 

Sakti impleaded in Settlement Court

12.

 

R.P.No. 27869/F/90-1 dated 16.7.91

 

W.P.No.

18334/87

 

S.R.A.No.

31/86 dt. 28.8.87

S.R.No.

96/79 dt.23.5.80

A.R.R.

P.Surya rao (NT)

Vs

•  Agent to Govt. of A.P W.G Eluru

•  Spl. Deputy Collector, T.W.Eluru

•  Spl. Deputy Tahasildar

•  Dadi Narayana swamy

Brief Note: This land belongs to grand-father of Dadi Narayanaswamy named Dadi Gopayya. He acquired it by Podu cultivation. Govindu, father of Dadi Narayanaswamy also cultivated this land and got Izara patta for 178 acres.

 

Vakalat of Dadi Narayana Swamy is available and yet to be filed.

 

Legal aid provided by I.T.D.A.

Filed on October 1990

 

Case is pending still.

13.

 

R.P.

15361/F/90

 

S.R.A.No. H3/31/86 dated 15-10-86

 

S.R.No. 96/79 dated 23-5-80

A.R.R.

Ch.Ramayamma

Vs

•  Agent to Govt. of A.P W.G Eluru

•  Spl. Deputy Collector, T.W.Eluru

•  Spl. Deputy Tahasildar

•  Dadi Narayana swamy (tribal)

Brief Note: This land belongs to father of Dadi Narayanaswamy. But non-tribals are in possession and enjoyment. LTR proceedings are held. In the LTR order, 35 acres of land out of 50 acres is issued in favour of Dadi Narayanaswamy and remaining land to the non-tribals. The non-tribals obtained stay order from the High Court. The writ petition was disposed off directing to file the revision petition before the govt.

 

Vakalat is available and yet to be filed.

R.P.Pending

Representation given to Social Welfare Department.

14.

 

W.P. No. 14109/90

A.R.R.

1. Kalagara Subba Rao,

2. K.Vigneswara Rao

3. K.Anasuya

4. K.Kumaraswamy

5. K.Ramachander Rao

 

Vs

•  The Govt. of AP rep. by its Principal Secretary, TW dept. Hyderabad

•  The Agent to Govt.Dist.Collector, W.G.Dist.

•  The Spl.Deputy Collector, TW, W.G.Dist.

•  The Spl.Deputy Tahsildar, TW, W.G.Dist.

•  The MRO, Butaigudem

6. Jeedem Kamudu, Polavaram.

Relief Sought: To issue a writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondent government of AP in not disposing of the Revision petition so far and in not passing the orders on the stay petition in the meantime as arbitary, illegal and bad in law.

 

Relief Granted: " This court by an order dated 8-10-90 granted interim stay of the operation of the order of the special Deputy Collector, Tribal Welfare, Eluru in S.R.No.26 of 1978 dated 29-9-78 and the confirming orders of the agent to the government (Dist.Collector) West Godavari , Eluru in SRA No.79 of 1978, dated 31.1.1983. Since this court has not granted any stay of futher proceedings on the file of the Government in the revision petition filed by the petitioners, there is no justification at all on the part of the first respondent - Government in not disposing of the revision petition. Mere pendncy of writ petition can not be a ground to keep the revision petition pending without disposing of the same.

 

Having vegard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the first respondent-Government is directed to dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioners after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and concerned parties within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

 

Till then the interim order granted granted by this court on 8.10.1990.

Pending

 

 

 

 

Order dated: 26-02-2001

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15.

 

W.P.7337/92

3319/87, 1470/89,

1474/89,

9304/89,

10251,

10259,

10508, 12395, 12642, 14099/98, 17036/90, 1343/94, 1290/94, 12948/96, 13179/96, 13180/96, 16141/96 and 23434/96

W.P.M.P 9072/92

S.R. no.s 6/89,7/89,8/89, 9/89,10/89,11/89,12/89,13/89,14/89,15/89 of Garapati family dated 10-6-92

A.R.R.

•  Garapati Acharyulu (NT)

•  Garapati Chakradhar(NT)

•  Garapati Venkat rao(NT)

•  Garapati Ranga rao(NT)

•  Garapati Dasaradha Maha Raju(NT)

•  Garapati Radhkrishna (NT)

•  Garapati Kutumba Rao (NT)

•  GarapaiRama Murthy (NT)

•  P. Radhakrishna (NT)

Vs

•  The Govt. Of India rep. By its Secretary

•  The Govt. Of A.P

•  The Dist. Collector

•  The Spl. Deputy Collector

 

 

 

 

 

Brief Note: The Special Deputy Collector (SDC) passed ejectment orders S.R. no.s 6/89,7/89,8/89, 9/89,10/89,11/89,12/89,13/89,14/89,15/89 dated 10-6-92 against the non tribals Garapati Acharyulu etc, since purchase of land from non tribal to non tribal prohibited from 3-2-70. Non tribals who purchased lands after the specified date received ejectment orders. They filed number of Writ Petitions challenging the inclusion of their villages having non tribal majority in the Scheduled Area obtained stay orders and continued their possesion of land i.e. for another 10 to 15 years, till the stay orders were vacated. The Garapati family in one court or another getting orders and intimidating the tribals for whom lands are distributed

 

Relief Sought : Declaring that the inclusion of the petitioners Narayangudem, Jeelugumilli, Revenue Mandal, W.G.Dt in the scheduled areas as illegal and without jurisdiction and that the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation No.1 of 1959 as amended by regulation No.1 of 1970 do not apply to the petitioners' village or more particularly to any of the petitioners herein or the lands held by them.

Relief Sought by impead petitioner:to permit petitioner to be impleaded a 5th respondent in the above petition.(in 9072/92)to vacate the interim direction granted in W.P.M.P No.9072/92 in W.P.No.7337/92 dt.18-6-92.

***

Relief Granted: " Issue of writ of mandamus is sought for, but this court in its prerogative power do not issue such a mandamus unless there is a wrong action or inaction. In the instant case, it can neither be said that there is a wrong action nor inaction for the reason that the petitioners have never apprised the governor the need to consider and delete the named villages from the ambit of scheduled areas. For that reason, these writ petitions are dismissed, as premature, as being without cause of action. If the petitioners so wish, they may make representation to the governor with all relevant material and this court hopes and trusts that the governor will look into that representation along with the representation and then take a decision accordingly either to report to the president or not with regard to the plea of the petitioners for deletion of the named villages from the purview of the scheduled areas. The petitioners may avail of one month's period from the date of receipt of a copy of this order for making such representation and having regard to the fact that there is unrest in the areas concerned and also law and order problem, the representation may be considered by the Governor as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four months from the date of submission of such a representation. All interim orders hitherto granted stand vacated."

Direction on 29-10-97. Dismissed

Filed on 15-6-92

 

implead petition filed on 14-7-92

 

Direction on 29-10-97

 

Dismissed

Disposed On : 29-Oct-1997

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tribals of Barrinkalapadu are cultivating the land pattas issued to them.

16.

W.P.M.V.P.No.1119/92

 

A.R.R.

 

SAKTI

Vs

 

•  G.Acharyulu and 8 others

•  The Govt. Of India rep. Its Secretary

•  The Govt. Of A.P

•  The Dist. Collector

•  The Spl. Deputy Collector

 

 

17.

W.P. 1227/95

A.R.R.

Smt.Gudipati Hymavathi

Vs

Govt.of A.P and others

Vakalat filed

Order

18.

14974/95

WPMP 1762/95

 

A.R.R.

Komaram Ganga

Vs

•  M.R.O., Buttaigudem

•  R.D.O, Kovvuru,

•  Madakam Durgamma

•  Banne Bhudevi

 

Brief Note: Both petitioner and respondents are tribals and cousin sisters. The petitioner's Scheduled land belongs to the respondent father. But the lands are in possession of petitioner who is acting as benamy to one Naidu Venkatrao non-tribal who kept her as concubine. Banne Bhudevi here in filed a petition before Sub-collector kovvuru with the help of Sakti organisation and land was handed over to Bhudevi. Komaram Ganga, who is a concubine to non-tribal filed this petition.

 

Relief Sought: To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1 st and 2 nd respondents in refusing to furnish the copy of the order alleged to haven been passed on 24-6-1995 or an any other date where under ordering the petitioner to evict the lands Ac.12.00 comprised in Survey No.219/2, 220/5, 249/2, 238/1 and 216 situated at Chenchugudem village, Buttaigudem mandal, W.G.Dist. is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the above land.

***

Relief Granted: " The respondents herein be and hereby are directed not to evict the petitioner from the subject lands to hold fresh enquiry by giving opportunity to the petitioner."

Legal aid is provided by I.T.D.A.

 

Relief Granted: " In the circumstances, the transaction between respondents 3 and 4 and the petitioner appears to be valid. Further, it appears from the record that the first respondent passed the order directing the petitioner to surrender the possession to respondents 3 and 4 without giving oppertunity to the petitoner. For the aforesaid reasons, the order passed by the second respondent is set aside an he is directed to hold enquiery afresh by giving opertunity to the petitioner as contemplated under the Act. The petitioner be put in possession of the land in question till the dispute within one week is finally decided by the respondent 1 and 2".

 

 

 

Order

 

 

filed on 13-7-95.

 

Disposed On : 21-Nov-1995

direction on 14-7-95.

Direction on21-11-95

19.

13940/95

WPMP 17801/95

A.R.R.

Jogani Sanyasamma(NT)

Vs

Podiam Pedavenkaiah(tribal)

 

Disposed On : 01-Dec-2008

 

Order

20.

WP 12232/95

WPMP 1899/95

A.R.R.

K.Venkata Raju(NT)

Vs

Modiem Subba Rao(tribal)

 

 

Order

21.

WP 10617/95

WPMP /95

WPMVP /95

A.R.R.

Gandham Dhanunjaya & others(NT)

Vs

Korsa Venkateswara Rao & others(tribal)

 

Order

22.

WP 13629/95

WPMP 862/96

WPMP/96

A.R.R.

Ballareddy Laxmana Rao(NT)

Vs

Chavalam Buchanna(tribal)

(Implead Petition vacate stay)

vakalat to be filed.

 

Refer to letter of Ramalingeswara rao 11-8-96.

Remanded to Collector

Disposed On : 24-Feb-2003

23.
WP NO. 223366/96

K.S.M.

SAKTI

Vs

The Settlement Officer, Kovvur, W.G.Dist.

 

 

 

Relief Sought : to permit the petitioner organization to canvass the cause of the tribals of West Godavari area in the Settlement Court , Kovvur, W.G.Dist.

 

***

Relief Granted: "In this View of the matter I hold that the petitioner-organization is entitled to represent the cause of the tribals wherever and whenever it is necessary for safeguarding the interests of the tribals. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to permit the petitioner organization to represent the cause of the tribals either individually or collectively."

 

 

 

 

Direction on 29.9.1997

24.

W.P.No.

8009/97

P.Gangamma and others (tribal)

Vs

Dist.Collector, West Godavari

Relief sought: To issue writ or order more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not allowing the tribals who are being assisted by volunteers to participate in survey conducted by respondents in scheduled areas of West Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequentially directs the respondents to furnish copies of reports prepared by them. Statement submitted by all persons to the concerned tribals or N.G.O. working in the area and entertain objections submitted on behalf of the tribals

***

Relief Granted: "Direction is given to all the survey teams to allow either the tribals or their representatives to be present at the time of conducting the survey operations and all the objections raised by them have to be recorded in writing and they should be answered while finalising the survey operations."

 

 

 

 

Disposed On : 22-Apr-1997

 

 

Direction given on 22-4-97

25.

 

CCNo. 1381/97

In W.P.8009/97

 

 

K.S.M.

Payam Gangamma (tribal)

Vs

Sri Vasudha Misra

Dist Collector, W.G.Dist.

Relief Sought : Case is filed contending that the order of this court dated: 18.11.1997 has been violated by the contemnors

***

Relief Granted: Para No.12: " The directions that are going to be given hereunder are not only consolidated but also comprehensive and are intended to be a one time measure. In other words the record of rights over the land in tribal areas that are going to be prepared in accordance with the guidelines given under shall be final and binding on all the including the government, of course, subject to the appellant jurisdiction"

Para No.17 "This contempt case is closed by directing all the concerned involved in the implementation of agency laws including reverification work, to implement the above directions. It is also clear that violation of any of the above guidelines will be viewed seriously".

 

 

 

Direction on 2-1-98

Disposed On : 21-Jan-1998

26.

W.A.No.

1011/97

Against W.P.No.
7261/97

 

K.S.M.

Non-tribals

Vs

SAKTI and Settlement Officer, Kovvuru,

Relief Sought : To set aside the orders of the single judge in W.P.No.22366/96

***

Relief Granted: " the social voluntary organization thus created to protect such interests of the communities can legitimately represent their interests. No one should feel, by appearance of any such organization in the proceedings, that there would be any prejudice to his/her and legal rights. The appeal is dismissed"

dated: 01-09-1997

  Disposed On : 01-Sep-1997

Follow-up:

Below advocates are entrusted with the legal work

•  Sri Alluri Satyasai, Settlement Court , Kovvuru

•  Sri M.V. Ramanaath SDC, W.G., E.G.

•  Sri N.Gowri sankar, Khammam, Warangal

•  Sri Mukunda reddy for secretary, tribal welfare court

27.

W.P.No7916/97

 

A.R.R.

SAKTI and others

Vs

•  State of A.P. rep. By its Chief Secretary to govt.

•  The Principal Secretary to Govt. SW.Dept.

•  The Director General of Police

•  The Dist.Collector, W.G.Dist

•  The SP. W.G.Dist.

•  K.Lakshmi reddy, Addl. S.P., West Godavari

•  J. Brahma reddy, D.S.P., W.G. Dist.

Relief sought: 1. Declaring that the various actions of the respondents including the filing of false criminal cases against the petitioners amount to interference with the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article19(1) to C of constitution of India and consequently restrain the respondents from interfering with the lawful activities of the petitioners:

2. To direct the respondents 1,2 and 4 to take effective steps for distribution of land mentioned in the Annexure VI to writ petition to the tribals in the Jeelugumilli, Buttaigudem, Polavaram mandals in West Godavari District and pending disposal of the above writ petition.

i). To appoit an independent committee to study the actual situation of land problems in the 3 mandals of west Godavari district and submit the same to Hon'ble court for issuing appropriate directions

ii). Direct the respondents to give adequate security to the life of the petitioners, and pass such further orders as this Hon'ble court deem fit in the circumstances of the case.

 

***

Relief Granted: I am inclined to appoint Sri K.Taranath, Retired District Judge as a Commissioner of the Court to see that the guidelines given by the court are implemented in their true spirit.

---contd-on Annexure-I

Relief Sought in Supreme Court senior advocate Dr.Rajeev Dhavan:

Synopsis: " Despite the fact that several decisions of the High Court and Govt. G.Os over 30 years have tried to bring peace to the strife torn district of the West Godavari district of Andhra, in the case under appeal these efforts have called in question even though the point at issue in the Writ Appeal before the High Court was on a limited question.

The limited issue before the High Court was whether possession and entitlement of shri pusuluri Srihari could be interfered with in the light of the fact that the settlement in respect of the land of Shri Srihari had become final.

However, the High Court went far beyond the limited question to pronounce on the larger questions of judicial review in relation to tribal entitlements. The effect of this judgement is to fetter the broad powers of judicial review and undermined various other decisions of the High Court, which have become final. Thus, in B.Madhusudhan reddy Vs. State of A.P. & Co., (1997) A L.D. 811 (DB which has become final) on 28.7.1998 detailed directions were given which resulted in various govt. orders. Again, in Mrs.P.Gangamma & Ors. Vs. District Collector, West Godavari various directions were given on 2.1.98 relating to the record of rights. Now, the power of the High Court to give similar orders have been doubted.

 

The Scheduled Tribes of the West Godavari region have been systematically deprived of their rights and subjected to violence. Through the aegis of court decisions, representative public interest petitions, various orders have been passed. The duty to ensure justice for SC/ST is a power coupled with a duty (Comptroller and Auditor General Vs. K.S.Jaganatha, (1986) 2 SCC 679) in relation to all weaker sections - especially tribals (see: Longappa Pochanna Appelwar Vs. State of Mahrashtra, (1985) 1 SCC 479 at 493). In particular, this Hon'ble court in Shantistar Builders Vs.Narayan, (1990) 1 SCC 520 has laid down the permissibility of guidelines in the light of Article 46 of the Constitution. It is pertinent to mention that in a series of orders in Banwasi Sewa Ashram Vs.State of U.P., (1985) 3SCC 255; (1987) 3SCC 304; (1992) 2 SCC 202, this court prescribed a scheme for both legal aid and a regulatory framework to determine land entitlements. In Andhra, the fifth Schedule read with Regulation 3, which creates a presumption in favour of tribals, necessitates such directions being given. Even in the legal aid Act and the Schemes there is a special dispensation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

It is respectfully submitted that the impugned judgement is in excess of the limited question raised in the appeal and contrary to the various decisions of this Hon'ble court and the High Court"

•  Order Dismissed

News: 1) HC directs transfer of DSP, ASP and to fill District Collector's post - WEDNESDAY MAY 7 1997

2) Tribal land dispute: Court Commissioiner appointed - The Hindu, February 6, 2000

Filed on March 1997

 

Order

Direction on

24-01-2000

28.

W.P.M.P.

9649/97 in

W.P. 7916/97

 

•  Sakti

•  P.Sivaramakrishna

•  P.Sharada devi

Vs

•  Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary

•  Principal Secretary S.W.

•  D.S.P., W.G.

•  Dist Collector, W.G.

•  S.P., W.G.

•  G.N.V.S.Prasad

•  P. Vigneswara rao

•  G. Rajendra prasad

•  G. Bhaskara rao

•  Pusulu Srihari

Relief Sought: To direct the respondents to give adequate security to the life of the petitioners

***

Relief Granted: "About the conduct the of the Additional Superintendent of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police there are claims and counter claims in discharge of their duties dispassionately and impartially. Keeping the well known proverb in mind that justice is not only done but it seems to be done, I feel that these two officers should be shifted and in their place, new officers may be posted."

 

 

Court Direction dated: 2.5.97

 

Disposed On : 11-Sep-2002

29.

W.P.M.P. 9650/97 in

W.P. 7916/97

-do-

Relief Sought for W.P.M.P. No.9650/97: To appoint an independent committee to study the actual situation of land problems in three mandals viz., Jeelugumilli, Buttayagudem and Polavaram of West Godavari district

 

Relief Grant: Sri Bhanja Dev, Secretary, A.P.Legal Services Authority is appointed as Duty Counsel to visit the three mandals viz, Jeelugumilli mandal, Butaigudem mandal and Polavaram mandal.

 

 

Disposed On : 19-Jan-2001

 

Court Direction dated: 2.5.97

30.

W.P.M.P.No. 12049 /97 in

W.P.No. 7916/97

•  G.N.V.S. Prasad

•  K.Vigneshwara rao

•  Gadde B.R.Prasad

•  G.Bhaskararao

•  P.Srihari

Vs

•  Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary

•  Principal Secretary S.W.

•  D.G.P., W.G.

•  Dist Collector, W.G.

•  S.P., W.G.

•  Sakti

•  P.Sivaramakrishna

•  P.Sharada devi

Relief Sought: To restrain the petitioners from in any where interfering with the possession and enjoyment properties of the non-tribals

***

Relief Granted: "The Deputy Counsel should also submit a report about the lawlessness that is prevailing in these areas and at whose instances this situation has arisen and the role played by the police in maintaining the law and order in the areas and whether the sakti organisation, the petitioner in this writ petition is conducting the agitation in a peaceful and democratic manner or whether the activities of this organisation are in any way objectionable and fall under any of the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and who are really instigating the people of the areas to resort to violence."

 

 

 

 

Court Direction: dated: 2.5.97

 

Disposed On : 16-Jun-1997

31.

W.A.No. 496/97

•  Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary

•  Principal Secretary S.W.

•  D.G.P., W.G.

•  Dist Collector, W.G.

•  S.P., W.G.

Vs

•  Sakti

•  P.Sivaramakrishna

•  P.Sharada devi

•  G.N.V.S. Prasad

•  K.Vigneshwara rao

•  G.B.R.Prasad

•  G.Bhaskararao

•  P.Srihari

Prefered by the Government against the orders dated: 2.5.1997 made in w.p.m.p.no.9649/97 in w.p.no.7916/97

Direction on

13-05-1997

 

Disposed On : 01-May-1997

32.

W.A.No. 503/97 in W.P. No. 7916/97

•  G.N.V.S. Prasad

•  K.Vigneshwara rao

•  Gadde B.R.Prasad

•  G.Bhaskararao

•  P.Srihari

Vs

•  Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary

•  Principal Secretary S.W.

•  D.G.P., W.G.

•  Dist Collector, W.G.

•  S.P., W.G.

•  Sakti

•  P.Sivaramakrishna

•  P.Sharada devi

Prefered by the Non-tribals against the order dated: 2.5.97 made in W.P.M.P.No's 9649, 9650 and 12049/97 in W.P.No.7916/97

 

The Court set aside the orders dated 2.5.97 as transferring officers and posting them is the executive function of the state and this court can never interfere in such exercise of power by the Executive, when they are to be transferred and where and for what, is the executive function of the state to be discharged and this court can never interfere in such executive power

Direction on

13-05-1997

 

Disposed On : 20-Jan-1997

33.

W.P.M.P.No.

In

W.P.No. 7916/97

•  Sakti

•  P.Sivaramakrishna

•  P.Sharada devi

Vs

•  Govt. of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary

•  Principal Secretary S.W.

•  D.G.P., W.G.

•  Dist Collector, W.G.

•  S.P., W.G

Affidavit filed by P.Balakrishna murthy, Social Worker on behalf of petitioners organization SAKTI in W.P.no.7916/97.

 

Relief Sought: Unless the Court Commissioner is appointed to supervise the implementation of the directions of the Hon'ble High Court in C.C.No.1381/97 dt.2.1.1998

 

 

 

Filing date:

October 1999

 

Order

34.

WAMP

468/2000

In

WA244/2000

In W.P.7916/97

P.Srihari (NT)

Vs

Sakti and others

Relief Sought : To suspend the orders of the learned single judge passed in W.P.No.7916/97, dt.24.1.2000.

***

Relief granted: "The operation of the impugned order is stayed till further orders.

It is however, made clear that by the stay of operation of the impugned order, the government is not restrained from discharging it duties in accordance with law".

Filing on 23-02-2000

 

 

Direction on

14-03-2000

 

Order

35.

WA 244/2000

In W.P.7916/97

P.Srihari(NT)

Vs

SAKTI and others

Relief Granted: " As seen from the said order passed by the learned single judge and directives issued, the village level committees and district level committees were constituted and non-governmental organizations were directed to be involved in the enquiry proceedings for doing several acts mentioned in the order and also in the decision making process. All these directives of the learned single judge are in the nature of running the administration, both on the executive side and also judicial side. The High Court sitting in its extra-ordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of constitution of India cannot have such powers to encroach upon the fields left for the executives and also statutory authorities discharging the judicial functions thus leading to infraction of article 50 of Indian constitution, which envisages separation of powers, both legislative, executive and judiciary. The power of judicial review conferred on High Courts under article 226 of constitution is a special and extra-ordinary one to be invoked whenever there is an unconstitutionality in the legislative act as also illegality in the executive act and either to set aside, quash or correct the same. Further, such intervention by judicial review can only be in specific cases and there cannot be any wholesale allegations of non-compliance of the functions of the statutory authorities and monitoring the same by judicial action. There are several beneficial enactments to safeguard the interests of the scheduled tribes.

The respective authorities under the above enactment's will have to perform their functions and if in any particular case violation is alleged, it is for the authorities under the said acts to take-up the matter and decide and only when an order is passed in a particular case, then the same should be appealed against in the manner provided in the said laws and not otherwise. If there is any inaction in a particular matter, the same can be brought to the notice of the authorities mentioned in the Act or in a proper case by way of writ petition before this court. Suffice it to say that the exercise undertaken by the learned single Judge is not one traceable under article 226 of constitution of India .

In the result, we set aside the impugned order of the learned single judge. The writ Appeal is thus allowed".

Direction on

27-04-2001

 

 

Dismissed

 

Disposed On : 11-Oct-2001

 

 

36.

W.A.M.P.No. in

W.P.M.P.No.

468/2000 in

WA no.

244/2000 In

WP No. 7916/97

P.Srihari

Vs

Sakti

Relief Sought: To vacate the interim suspension granted in W.A.M.P.No.468/2000 in W.A.244/2000

Filing date:

17 th March 2000

 

Order

37.

CC No.1649 in WP No 15132/99

Pusuluri Srihari

Vs

•  District Collector

•  MRO, Buttayagudem mandal

Relief Sought: To direct respondents not to conduct the survey and records verification in the presence of political parties

***

Relief granted: Since entire matter relating to the title verification work is subjudice in the Honourable High Court of A.P. in W.A. No.244/2000 the Collector, West Godavari is informed to stop the title verification of work.-Ref: Memo.No. 9514/LTR.1/99-13 dated 23-02-2001 of T.W. Department

Filing date 12-12-2000

 

Disposed On : 25-Jan-2000

 

Order

38.

W.P.No.14677/99

 

A.R.R.

•  Pandu Lakshmi (tribal)

•  Kunja Mangamma (tribal)

•  Potta Jagadamba (tribal)

•  Sirri Sankuramma (tribal)

Vs

•  District Collector& Agent to Government, W.G.Dt.,

•  The Mandal Revenue Officer, Jeelugumilli mandal

•  Garapati Acharyulu

•  Garapati Chakradhar Rao

•  Garapati Venkata Rao

•  Garapati Ranga Rao

•  Garapati Dasaratha Maha Raju

•  Garapati Radhakrishna

•  Garapati Kutumba Rao

•  Garapati Ramamurthy

•  Pichikala Radhakrishna all of Nersugudem village, Jeelugumilli mandal, W.G. dt.

Relief Sought: To issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not handing over physical position of the lands to the petitioners and others in pursuance of assignment orders issued in proceedings no. ROC 607/97/C dated 31-12-97 by the second respondent as illegal and void and consequently declare that the petitioners and other assignees are entitled to take position of the lands from the respondents 3 to 11 in pursuance of the orders of assignment issued by the second respondent and pending disposal of the above writ petition, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to handover physical position of the land to the petitioners and others in pursuance of the orders of assignment issued in Roc no. 607/97/C dated 31-12-97 and pass such further orders.

***

Relief Granted: " The order passed in w.p.no.11543/99 dt.14.2.2001

however, direct the Dist. Collector, West Godavari to issue pattas to those who are eligible therefore without taking into consideration the fact that the Contempt case is pending, in as much as by reason of pendency of such proceedings, no embargo has been placed upon the District Collector to distribute such pattas"

-Order of Division Bench

 

"By order of high court dt.26.7.2001 in w.p.m.p.no.19082 of 2001 in w.p.no.15259 of 2001 filed by the petitioner(s) viz.1. Gogam Rajarao 2) Gogam Ramana - addressess: 1 to 4 are directed not to distribute or handover the land an extent of Ac.135 situated at Narsigudem to the 64 beneficiaries of the 5 th addressee society pending further order - order follows."

-Order of Single Judge

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Order(word file)

 

 

direction on 30.11.2000

 

 

ORDER

(connected matter)

39.

W.P.No. 15259/2001

•  Gogam Rajarao

•  Gogam Ramana

Vs

•  The Govt. Of A.P

•  The Agent to the Govt. And Dist. Collector Eluru

•  The Spl. Deputy collector, K.R. Puram

•  The M.R.O Jeelugumilli

•  The Barrinkalapadu Girijana Co.operative Collective Farming Society,Barrinkalapadu, Jeelugumilli Mandal

By order of High Court Dt.26-7-2001 in WPMPNo.19082/2001 in WPNo.15259/2001 filed the petitioner(s) viz, Gogam Raja rao,.Gogam Ramana- Addressees 1to 4 are directed not to distribute or handover the land an extent of Ac.135 situated at Narsiguda to the 64 beneficiaries of the 5th addressee society pending further order.

 

Interim order dt. on

26-07-2001

Pandu Lakshmi to be impleaded

 

 

ORDER

40.

W.P.No.18347/2000

A.R.R.

SAKTI, Rep.by Dr.P.Sivaramakrishna

Vs

The Secretary to Govt.T.W.Dept.

And others

Relief sought : To issue an appropriate, writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to initiate necessary immediate action for filing appeals against the orders passed by the SDC (TW) K.R.Puram, W.G.Dist. in respect of cases initiated by the third respondent under sec.3(1)of A.P. scheduled area land transfer regulation no.1 of 59 as amended by reg.1 of 70 by declaring the inaction of the respondents as illegal and void.

***

Relief Granted: " The relief prayed for in this writ petition cannot be granted as it is for the persons aggrieved from the order passed by the competent authority to prefer an appeal or not to do so and this court in exercise of its discretion under article 226 of the constitution of India cannot direct the concerned authority to prefer an appeal on behalf of the tribals land transfer regulation,1959".

 

Letter from Supreme Court, Advocate Sri K.Sukumaran:

"The high court of Andhra Pradesh has taken very narrow view of the liberal scheme of the Constitution of India which has given great emphasis on the protection of the weakest sections in the society. The directive Principles of State Policy also loudly proclaim that objective.

The attitude may be justified with reference to proceeding relating to the general litigations. There is, however, substantial difference in the cause, that is now sought to be espoused by an organization which has established its credibility, as detailed in the Writ Petition.

The Special Leave Petition has been settled by me, for being filed in the Supreme Court".

- SLP Dismissed

Filed on 21-09-2000

 

 

 

 

 

Direction on 12-12-2000

 

Disposed On : 12-Dec-2000

41.

W.P. No.

2714/2000

K.S.M.

•  Madakam Lakshmi(tribal)

•  Tati Ramulu (Tribal)

•  Konagala Ranga Rao,

Vs

•  The Commissioner, TW Govt. of A.P. Samkshema bhavan,

•  The Dist. Collector WG Dist.

•  The MRO Jeelugumilli

•  The MRO Buttaigudem

•  The MRO Polavaram

Relief sought: To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the section of the respondents in not convening the District Committee meeting and not following the guidelines as decided in proceedings of R-1 Dt: 5-12-1997 as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the authorities to convene the meeting of the Dist. Level Committee forthwith for every 2 months and follow the decisions of the Committee to implement the rule and guidelines dt: 5-12-97 within a time frame of 6 months.

***

Relief granted: " The learned govt.pleader has placed before me copy of the communication in memo no.9514/LTR/99-13 dated: 23.2.2001 addressed to the collector, W.G.Dist., wherein the orders issued to him by the govt.in memo no.9514/LTR/99-12 dt.2.7.2000 to go-ahead with the title verification of the left over villages as per the guidelines issued by the government. In the matte, referring to the orders of this hon'ble court in WAMP 468 of 2000 in W.A.244/2000 dt.14.3.2000, have been withdrawn and the collector was directed to stop the title verification work forthwith."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Direction on 30.03.2001

 

Closed

 

Disposed On : 09-Jan-2003

42.

W.P.M.P. No16662/01

In

W.P No13373/0 1

 

K.S.M.

Madakam Lakshmi(tribal)

Vs

•  The Dist. Collector W.G

•  The M.R.O Jeelugumilli and others

Relief Sought: to direct Respondents 2 and 3 to make available the consolidated details of enjoyment survey and title verification and also the details of some patta lands and poramboke lands in the occupation of non-tribals as sought in the meeting of Dist. Level Committee held on 29-11-1999.

***

Relief Granted: "There shall be an interim direction to the respondents to make available the consolidated details of enjoyment survey and title verification and details of patta lands and poromboke lands in the occupation of non-tribals.The necessary information shall be furnished within two weeks from today.It shall be open to the petitioner to file a further application furnishing further particulars as to the documents required by her."

 

 

Order

Order(word file)

Direction on

04-07-2001

 

Disposed On : 15-Mar-2002

43.
W.P.M.P No.

18899/2000

In

W.P.No.

19896 / 2000

 

K.S.M.

T.Krishnaveni (tribal women of W.G.Dist.)

Vs

•  Dist. Collector,W.G.Dist

•  Asst.Director, Survey and Land records,. Eluru and

•  MRO, Jeelugumilli mandal

Relief Sought : to make available the consolidated details of enjoyment survey and title verification and details of some patta lands and such poromboke in the occupation of non tribals as sought in the meeting of Dist.Level Committee held on 29.11.1999.

***

Relief granted: "The petitioner is not asking for supply of any confidential or precluded information. The documents required by the petitioner are the public documents. In fact, the committee itself was constituted for the purpose of attaining those details regarding the possession of lands in the occupation of non-tribals. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents by furnishing the copies of those documents now required by the petitioner.

There shall be an interim direction to respondents 2 and 3 to make available the consolidated details of enjoyment survey and title verification and details of patta lands and poramboke lands in the occupation of non-tribals. The necessary information shall be furnished within two weeks from today. It shall be open to the petitioner to file a further application furnishing further petitioners as to the documents required by her."

News: 1. Selective sloth - NewsTime Tuesday September 19, 2000

2. Cops hound gutsy tribal woman - Deccan Chronicle, November 16, 2000

 

 

 

 

 

Direction on

23-08-2000

 

Disposed On : 23-Nov-2000

 

Order

44.

WPMP.

3751/2001

In W.P.No.

2962 of 2001

W.P.M.P.23020 of 2002

K.S.M.

(Bundle No.58)

•  Ooka Surya Chandram (tribal)

•  SAKTI

Vs

•  The Spl.Dy.Collector (TW). K.R.Puram

•  The Dist.Collector, W.G.Dist.

Relief Sought : To direct the respondent No.1 to take on file the proceedings and material filed by the petitioner organization.

***

Relief Granted: " 1 st respondent is directed to take on file the proceedings and material filed by the petitioner's organization through Sri.M.V.Ramana, Advocate, Rajahmundry ."

 

W.P.M.P. Relief Sought: It is prayed that this hon'ble court may pleased to direct R1 to show the 2 nd petitioner organisation as party in the cause title while disposing, of SR that is orders passed by special deputy collector under Sec 3(2) (a) of APSALT regulatin as amended by regulation 1/70 and pass such order or order.

Relief Granted: " Heard both sides. The first petitioner and also the voluntary Organisation 2 nd petitioner are pursuing the case of tribals and taking proper steps to file documents and adduce evidence on their behalf. Even the order passed on 7.12.2001 also show that the petitioners appeared and pursued the case of the tribals. There is no reason why their name should not be shown.

There shall be interim direction as prayed . WPMP allowed."

 

 

 

Direction on

22-02-2001

 

M.P.Filed on 21-09-02

 

 

 

Direction on 20-01-2003

 

Disposed On : 07-Mar-2001

45.

W.P.MP.No.

In

WP.

25795/2000

A.R.R.

Pandu Adilakshmi and others (tribals)

Vs

Muppidi Satyanarayana reddy and Others (non-tribals)

Relief Sought : To permit the petitioners to be impleaded as respondents 3 to 8 in the above writ petition. The petitioners failed to indicate the name of the vendor who has executed the registered sale deed on 20.05.1970. I further submit that I am advised that G.O.Ms.No.129 dt.13.08.1979 was struck down by this Hon'ble court since the govt.has no power to issue any relaxation to the A.P.scheduled area land transfer regulation 1959. The said regulation was framed by the president of India , in exercise of the powers conferred under schedule V of the Constitution and any amendment to such regulation should be assented by the Hon'ble president of India only and the govt. has no power. Hence the order passed by the Agent to the Govt. in S.R.A.No.20 of 1983 on 14.03.1984 are honest in law. Further I submit that the Agent to the govt. was not made a party to the present writ petition and there is no averment in the writ petition that the petitioners are in possession of the land as on the date of the filing of the writ petitions. It is therefore just and necessary that this hon'ble court may be pleased to vacate the interim order granted in W.P.No.25795 of 2000 dt.22.12.2000.

Relief Granted: "I am not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioners in the writ petition ti file a revision before the Government by raising objections, if any available to them in accordance with law. Status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained for a period of six (6) weeks from the date of rereceipt of a copy of this order".

 

Order Date: 18-07-2002

 

Disposed On : 18-Jul-2002

46.

W.P.M.P. 2001

In

W.P.

24804/2000

 

K.S.M.

Non-tribal ryots welfare society And others

Vs

•  The Union of India rep. By its secretary

•  The Secretary to the President

•  The Chief Secretary, govt of A.P

•  The govt. Of A.P rep. By its secretary

•  The govt. Of A.P rep.by its Secretary

•  The Dist. Collector

•  T.Krishnaveni(impleaded) (Tribal)

Relief Sought : To permit the petitioner herein to implead herself as party respondent in W.P.No.24804/2000.

***

Relief granted: directing the respondents to delete Dharbhagudem village from the Schedule to the constitution to direct the 4th respondent to provide separate security for the protection of non- tribals of Dharbhagudem and to prevent the criminal tresspass and robbery of the Agricultural produce of the non-tribal ryots of Dharbhagudem village

filed on 12-12-2000

 

ORDER

 

Order(word file)

47.

W.P.M.P.

22738/01

In

W.P.

18141/2001

K.S.M.

•  Sariam Ramulamma

•  Datla Lakshmanarao

•  Chintam Nageswararao

•  Sunnam Varalakshmi

•  Tellam Balakrishna

(All are Tribals)

Vs

•  The Dist.Collector, W.G.

•  The MRO, Jeelugumilli

Relief Sought : To direct the respondents to make available the consolidated details of enjoyment survey and title verification and details of AWD lands, patta lands and poromboke lands in occupation of non-tribals as sought by the petitioners for villages (i) Tatiramannagudem (ii) Lankalapalli (iii) Sirivarigudem (iv) Rachannagudem (v) Chandranna colony of jeelugumilli mandal, W.G.dist. pending the w.p.no.18141/2001 on the file of the high court.

***

Relief Granted: " The respondents are directed to make available the consolidated details of enjoyment survey and title verification and details of AWD lands, patta lands and poramboke lands in the occupation of non-tribals as prayed for in respect of (i)Tatiramannagudem (ii) Lankalapalli (iii) Sirivarigudem (iv) Rachannagudem (v) Chandranna colony of jeelugumilli mandal, west godavari dist. It shall be open to the petitioners to file further application seeking further particulars as to the documents required by them."

 

 

 

 

 

 

Direction on 13-August - 2001

 

Disposed On : 25-Sep-2002

48.

W.P.No.

21636/2001

K.S.M.

1. Paida Venkaiah 38 yrs

w/o. Nagulu,

r/o. Busarajupalli,

Butaigudem mandal, W.G.

2. Sunnam Ramudu 34 yrs

s/o. Chellaiah r/o. Jainavarigudem, Buttaigudem (m) W.G.

3. Jillam Chinna Rao 21 yrs

s/o. Lakshmudu r/o. E.Regulakunta, Butaigudem(m), W.G.Dist.

4. Madakam Maramma 40 yrs

and

1. The Dist. Collector, West Godavari Dist. Eluru,

2. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Butaigudem (m) West Godavari Dist.

3. Prl.Secretary, Social Welfare.

Relief Sought : To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring the inaction on the part of respondents in not furnishing the records and enjoyment survey and other details with regard to Busarajupalli, Jainavarigudem, East Ragulakunta and Kangalavarigudem and Butaigudem of Butaigudem mandal, West Godavari District and going ahead with the issuance of pattadar pass books to non-tribals land lords as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to receive objections from the petitioners and other tribals while initiating action as per law to implement the land transfer regulations after making available final conclusions of the survey of four villages in Butaigudem mandal, W.G.Dist to the petitioners and pass such or further orders.

 

 

Affidavit filed by Paida Venkaiah on

__ 10-2001

 

 

ORDER

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Mandal Revenue Officer in his affidavit filed 13-12-2001 submitted "that it is open for the tribals to get what ever available the record with Mandal Revenue officer, Butaigudem for furtherance of their interest and pave the way for implementationof land regulations."

 

Followup: The tribals and advocates collected the above records from the revenue officials.

49.

RPNo.

21721/F1/90 of 2001

A.R.R.

1. Vanga Gangulu (tribal)

Revision petition pending with Govt in R.P.No.21721/F1/90,SDC's S.R.No.63/77,Agent to Govt.Eluru S.R.A.No.68/77

 

legal aid provided by I.T.D.A.

 

50.

W.P.No.

4215/78

A.R.R.

•  Kunja Venkata swamy (Tribal)

H.C granted stay in W.P.No.4215/78 dt.27-9-73 pending disposal of settlement case,SDC's S.R No.5/77,Agent to Govt. ,Eluru S.R.A.No.8/77.

 

legal aid provided by I.T.D.A.

 

 

51.

W.P.No.

9356/86

A.R.R.

1. Kanithi Mukkayya

2. Kanithi Gopalam

H.C remanded the case to Agent to govt.,W.G.Dist. Eluru in W.P.No.9356/86 dt.1-8-89

legal aid provided by I.T.D.A.

 

52.

 

A.R.R.

•  M Buchi reddy, (tribal) chintalagudem

•  Medivi Mutyalu (Tribal)

records are not available readily

 

legal aid provided by I.T.D.A.

 

53.

WPMPNo.29751 of 02 in

W.P.No.23702

 

K.S.M.

Pandu Adilakshmi

Korasa Venkamma

Vs.

•  The Dist.collector, W.G.Dist.

•  The Mandal Revenue Officer, Jeelugumilli mandal, W.G.dist.

Relief Sought : To direct the Respondent No.2 to dispose of the objections filed from the villagers pending W.P.No.23702 of 2002 on the file of the High Court.

 

Relief Granted: "Directions issued by this court in W.P.No.14896 of 2000, the consolidated details of enjouyment, survey number and title verification and also details of patta lands and poramboke lands in the occupation of non-tribals were furnished to the petitioners. The petitioners after verification of the said prticulars claim to have submitted a representation dated 6.2.2002 to the District Collector pointing out certain discrepancies in the particulars so furnished. The 1 st respondent in turn had addressed a letter dated 1.9.2002 to the 2 nd respondent to examine the discrepancies pointed out by the petitioners and to resolve the same and send compliance report by 30-9-2001. Petitioners complain that the direction issued by the 1 st respondent has not been complied with by the 2 nd respondent so far. Prima facie thee does not exist any justification for the 2 nd respondent to sit over the matter.

Accrdingly there shall be an interim direction to the 2 nd respondent to comply with the directions issued by the 1 st respondent through letter dated 1.9.2001 within a peiod of two months from the ate of receipt of a coy of this order.

 

 

 

Direction on 28-11-2002

 

ORDER

 

 

Order(word file)

   

 

W.P. No. 5515/87 M.P.No.7398/87 Date:May 1987

W.P. No. 6175/87 M.P.No.8273/87 Date:May 1987

 "Managing Director Godavari plywoods ltd. Rampachodavaram E.G.Dt. be and hereby is directed not to cut any mango trees, jamun and jack trees and cutting the forests of Maredumilli mandal, E.G.Dt."

 Only matured or dying trees were to be felled. Jeelugu (Caryota urens) palm, trees yielding minor forest produce like tamarind or cane brakes, creepers were not to be touched. A gap of 20 meters from a stream.)         --Times of India, April 30, 1991.

 

The candidate has chosen a topical subject, very relevant to our thinking on culture, cognition and language. He has red widely and is familiar with the literature that matters. His linguistic and anthropological reasoning is sound. His language is clear and simple.

...evidence of the investigator's ability as a linguist by special training and as a linguistic anthropologist by self - cultivated interest.

Prof. A.Munirathnam Reddy, Head, Department of Social Anthropology,S.V.University, Tirupati - 517502

 

Enabling the Community to Gain Command Over the Administrative Process is Empowerment.

 

"Today the development is manaement without governance and governanace is without proper participation."

 

 

A.P.Cabinet Sub - Committee Report on Left Wing Extrremists. - P.Sivaramakrishna.

The only information the government or media always compile carefully is on Naxalite encounters, never the violations of the instruments of rule of law such as minimum wages, fifth schedule, mismanagement of forests, equity in the distribution of welfare benefits, displacement, fragmentation of Socio-economic entities etc. 

        

INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE ORDER

if the R & R is found to be lagging with reference to the fixed bench marks, the construction should accordingly be deferred / stopped;

FORESTS ARE RESERVOIRS OF WATER AND LUNGS OF OUR ENVIRONMENTS.

SAVE THEM FROM MINING AND DESTRUCTION.

Click here to Bauxite Case: Read full article.