Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1225 (AP)

Rashtriya Vanara Sena v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2022-11-07

D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

body2022
ORDER : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The issue raised in both these cases is concerning encroachment of endowment lands in Sy. Nos. 1 to 101 of Purushothapatnam Village, Yetapaka Mandal of Alluri Sitharama Raju District (formerly within East Godavari District), claimed to be belonging to Sree Seetha Ramachandra Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Bhadrachalam. Hence, both these cases are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 3. The prayer in W.P. (PIL) No. 169 of 2022 reads thus: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus in the larger interest of public declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 10 in not safeguarding and not prohibiting illegal encroachments and illegal constructions by various land grabbers over the lands admeasuring Ac. 917-00 cents, situated in Sy. Nos. 1 to 101, Purushttamapatnarn village, Yetapaka mandal, Alluru Seetha Rama Raju District, State of Andhra Pradesh, belonging to Sree Sita Ramachandra Swamy Devasthanam, Bhadrachalam, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of settled principles of Law and violation of Article 25 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 10 to take immediate steps for removal of encroachments and secure and safeguard the land admeasuring Ac. 917-00 cents in Sy. Nos. 1 to 101 situated in Purushothampatnam village, Yetapaka village, Alluri Seetararaju District and pass such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 4. The prayer in W.P. No. 4533 of 2022 reads thus: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the Petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not taking any steps for prevention of the encroachments and not taking action for removing the encroachments already made in the lands in Sy. Nos. Nos. 1 to 101 admeasuring Ac.889-50 cents situated at Purushothapatnam, Yetapaka Mandal, East Godavari District belonging to the Petitioner and granting mining leases, construction permissions, electricity and water connections in respect of the said land in favour of the encroachers of the said land is wholly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 26 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the Respondents are not entitled to grant mining leases, construction permissions, electricity and water connections to any person in respect of the said land and that the Petitioner Temple is entitled for prevention of the encroachments and removal of the encroachments already made in the said land and pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 5. At the outset, it is to be noted that some private respondents have themselves joined as parties to W.P. No. 4533 of 2022 by filing an implead application. However, we make it clear that we are not venturing into any independent claims of any particular individual, and owing to the lis involved, we will only deal with the issue of duty and responsibility of the State and its authorities in protecting the endowment lands from encroachments. 6. The issue of encroachment of government lands/public utility lands vested in the State, which are meant for common benefit of individuals, was considered in detail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2011) 11 SCC 396 , while dealing with a case of encroachment of village pond. In the said judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, having noted its earlier decisions in M.I. Builders (P) Ltd. vs. Radhey Shyam Sahu, 1999 (6) SCC 464 , Friends Colony Development Committee vs. State of Orissa, 2004 (8) SCC 733 and Hinch Lal Tiwari vs. Kamala Devi, AIR 2001 SC 3215 (followed by the Madras High Court in L. Krishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu, 2005 (4) CTC 1 Madras), issued the following directions as contained in paragraph 22 of the judgment, which reads thus: “22. Before parting with this case, we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorized occupants of Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat/Poramboke/Shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. Before parting with this case, we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorized occupants of Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat/Poramboke/Shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. For this purpose, the Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/Union Territories in India are directed to do the needful, taking the help of other senior officers of the Governments. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupant, after giving him a show cause notice and a brief hearing. Long duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularizing the illegal possession. Regularization should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some Government notification to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary or other public utility on the land.” 7. Since no steps are being taken by the Government and its authorities in protecting the government lands, despite the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh (supra) as noted above, and the public authorities are failing in their duties in protecting the government lands, which are meant for the common use of general public, despite bringing to their notice, public spirited persons are approaching this Court to intervene and direct the public authorities to protect the government lands from encroachments. 8. In a batch of such writ petitions, being W.P. (PIL) No. 140 of 2022 and batch, filed alleging inaction of the State and its authorities in protecting the government lands of different classifications, viz. 8. In a batch of such writ petitions, being W.P. (PIL) No. 140 of 2022 and batch, filed alleging inaction of the State and its authorities in protecting the government lands of different classifications, viz. tank land/grama kantham/burial ground/forest land/road margin/play ground/cart track/hill poramboke/coastal areas/grazing land etc., this Court, placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh (supra) and the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats (Protection of Property) Rules, 2011 framed by the State Government pursuant to the directions in the said judgment, issued the following directions, vide common order dated 14.09.2022: “(i) The executive authority, i.e. Panchayat Secretary, of the respective Gram Panchayats in the State shall identify the Gram Panchayat lands, which are unauthorizedly occupied/encroached, and take steps for removal of such encroachments by issuing notice and providing opportunity of hearing to the unauthorized occupants/encroachers in terms of the procedure prescribed in Rules of 2011. This complete exercise shall be done within a period of six months from today. (ii) So far as the encroachments over the lands concerning the Municipalities/Forest Department/Revenue Department are concerned, even if no separate Rules have been framed prescribing the procedure to be followed in the matter of removal of encroachments over those lands, the officials of the concerned Departments, i.e. the Departments of Municipal Administration, Forest and Revenue, shall also undertake and complete the exercise of identification of unauthorized occupations/encroachments over the lands belonging to their respective Departments, within a period of two months from today, and thereafter, take steps for removal of such encroachments by following the principles of natural justice, i.e. issuing notice and providing opportunity of hearing to the unauthorized occupants/encroachers, within a further period of four months.” 9. Since the issue raised in these cases is also regarding encroachment of endowment lands, following the judgment in W.P. (PIL) No. 140 of 2022 and batch, we direct that the authorities concerned shall undertake and complete the exercise of identification of unauthorized occupations/encroachments over the endowment lands belonging to Sree Seetha Ramachandra Swamy Vari Devasthanam, within a period of two months from today and thereafter, take steps for removal of such encroachments by following the relevant rules and the principles of natural justice, i.e. issuing notice and providing opportunity of hearing to the unauthorized occupants/encroachers, within a further period of four months. 10. With the above direction, the writ petitions are allowed. No costs. 10. With the above direction, the writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.