Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/22069/2026 of Katari Aruna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 5 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 22069/2026 Between: 1. KATARI ARUNA, W/O VEERAJU, D/O LATE VINTHA VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46
APHC010407202026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 22069/2026
Between:
1. KATARI ARUNA, W/O VEERAJU, D/O LATE VINTHA VENKATA
SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION
AGRICULTURIST R/O SURAPARAJU COLONY, MARUTHI
NAGAR, JANGAREDDIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
2. RAJULAPTI BABY SAROJINI, D/O LATE PALAGANI AKKAYYA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST R/O
121F, 2ND ROAD, NEAR WATER TANK, GOLLAYAGUDEM, RAJIV GRUHA KALPA COLONY, ELURU CITY AND DISTRICT
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT, FOREST, SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT,
A.P.
SECRETARIAT
AT
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238
2. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF
FOREST
FORCE,
ARANYA
BHAVAN,
APIIC
TOWERS,
MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH- 522503
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT-534006
4. THE SUB COLLECTOR, NUZIVID, ELURU DISTRICT-521201
5. THE FOREST SETTLEMENT OFFICER, WEST GODAVARI AND
KRISHNA DISTRICTS AT VIJAYAWADA-520001
6. THE TAHSILDAR, CHATRAI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT-521214
7. THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, ELURU DISTRICT-534002
8. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, NUZIVID, ELURU DISTRICT- 521201
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents in considering the Representations of the Petitioners with respect to their claim/title over Ac16.00 and Ac15.00 respectively in R.S No.1 of Polavaram Village, Chitrai Mandal, Eluru District as illegal, arbitrary, unfair, unconstitutional, unjust and unsustainable and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the claim of the Petitioners with respect to the subject land and denotify the same from Polavaram Forest Block of Eluru District(erstwhile Krishna District)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
SODUM ANVESHA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
2. GP FOR FORESTS
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER :
1. Heard Ms.N.Sahithi Aparna, learned counsel representing Ms.Sodum Anvesha, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Ms. Kudupudi Siva Jyothi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests.
2. This Writ Petition is filed seeking the indulgence of this Court to declare the inaction on the part of the respondents in not responding to the representation of the petitioners, with respect to their claim over Ac.15.00 cents and Ac.16.00 cents respectively in R.S.No.1 of Polavaram Village, Chitrai Mandal, Eluru District, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners' claim with respect to the subject land and to de-notify the same from the Polavaram Forest Block of Eluru District (erstwhile Krishna District).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been in possession and enjoyment of the subject land for the last several decades, and that they submitted representations dated 11.02.2026 and 16.02.2026 respectively to respondent No.5 to consider their claim to de-notify the subject land from the Polavaram Forest Block, but there has been no response from respondent No.5. She finally prayed that the Court direct respondent No.5 to take a decision on the respective representations made by the petitioners.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests brought to the notice of this Court that she has received written instructions in the matter, and submitted that the petitioners have placed reliance on the proceedings of the Collector, Krishna District, dated 11.09.1974. She submitted that this was only a proposal addressed to the Forest Officials to exclude an extent of Ac.835.36 cents of land in R.S.No.1 of Polavaram Village from the Reserved Forest in recognition of the alleged rights of the pattadars, and that the said proposal was made exclusively for the rehabilitation of Project Displaced Families affected by the Thammileru Reservoir Project, and not for the recognition, regularisation or protection of any private patta claims. She further submitted that the petition may be disposed of by granting eight (8) weeks' time to respondent No.5 to respond to the representations submitted by the petitioners and to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests, this Court need not go into the truth or otherwise of the rival contentions raised by the parties regarding the petitioners' claim over the subject land at this stage. This Court is conscious that mere directions to consider representations, without addressing the merits of the underlying claim, may make for a quick disposal of cases, but do no service to the cause of justice, as observed by the Apex Court in The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh1. However, since learned counsel for the petitioners has confined her prayer to a direction upon respondent No.5 to consider and dispose of the representations dated 16.02.2026 and 02.03.2026, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests has not opposed such a limited direction, this Court finds it appropriate to issue the same, leaving it open to respondent No.5 to examine the representations, including the scope and purport of the proceedings of the Collector, Krishna District, dated 11.09.1974, and to take a decision in accordance with law.
6. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.5 to respond to the respective representations made by the petitioners, dated 11.02.2026 and 16.02.2026, and to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
12019 (8) SCALE 544
Interim orders granted earlier if any, shall stand vacated. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 06.08.2026 Krs
THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
W.P.No.22069 of 2026
( ORDER )
DATE: 06.08.2026
Krs