Hear tribal’s plea, Collector told

Earlier the petitioner’s claim was rejected in Agency Court

- According to petitioner, Chodem Durga, a Koya tribal woman of Turpu Rekulakunta in West Godavari, owned a land of 10.72 acres in Turpu Rekulakunta
- However, the land has been occupied by some non-tribes and they have deprived her of access to justice

Eluru: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Tuesday set aside the recent order of West Godavari Collector, who passed an order in favour of non-tribes without giving any notice to the victim tribe. The single bench headed by Justice Raja Elango directed the Collector to issue notice to the petitioner Chodem Durga of Turpu Rekulakunta village in Buttayagudem mandal, whose claim was rejected in the Agency Court headed by the Collector. The Judge also directed the Collector to hear the appeal afresh, after putting the aggrieved tribe on notice.

According to petitioner Chodem Durga, a Koya tribe woman of Turpu Rekulakunta of Buttayagudem in West Godavari owned a land of 10.72 acres in the tribal village of Turpu Rekulakunta in Buttayagudem. However, the land has been occupied by some non-tribes and they have deprived of access to justice to the petitioner.

The tribal woman Chodem Durga filed a case in the Court of Special Deputy Collector (SDC-Tribal Welfare), Kotaramachandrapuram of Buttayagudem mandal a decade ago, seeking restoration of alienated land of Ac.5.56 in RS No.571/2 and Ac.10.72 cents in RS.No.1469 in Turpu Rekulakunta Village of Buttaygudem from the hold of non-tribes. The SDC Court after an enquiry passed an order in 2006 allowing the petitioner only Ac.4.72 cents out of 10.72 in the Survey N.1469 and disallowed the rest of the lands.

The petitioner in her petition filed in the High court of Andhra Pradesh stated that on the orders of SDC she appealed to the Collector who is a designated authority as Agent to the Government under Land Transfer Regulation (LTR) 1/1970. The Collector did not touch the findings of the SDS relating to Ac.4.72 cents given in favour of Chodem Durga. However, he upheld the contention of the non-tribes for the rest of the lands in 2011 after due enquiry into the rival claims. The petitioner in her appeal stated that even though the order was passed in favour of the tribe woman, the Mandal Revenue officer of Buttayagudem did not implement the orders of SDC.

She in her petition alleged that after the SDC and Collector findings, the non-tribal parties filed a writ petition in the High Court pleading false information that an appeal was pending before the Collector against the order of SDC and sought the High court to protect their possession of the land in Ac.4.72 cents. On this petition, the State High Court passed an order in April 2016 directing the district authorities concerned not to give effect to the order of the SDC, until the appeal is disposed off. The petitioner stated that already the SDC order was adjudicated by the Collector and was disposed off in 2011 and the non-tribes suppressed this fact before the High Court.

She stated that to cover up the misdeeds, an appeal was filed by non-tribals against the order of SDC. She stated that the Collector entertained the appeal of non-tribes usurping the power of Revision Authority under LTR Act 1/70 and passed an order in favour of non-tribes relating to the land of Ac.4.72 cents.

She stated that from the order of Collector in SRA 16/2016 passed arbitrarily without even giving any notice to the original tribal claimant by foreclosing their window of reasonable opportunity. Hearing on the petition of the petitioner-tribe woman, the single judge bench justice Raja Elango set aside the orders of Collector passed in August 2016 and directed the Collector to issue notice to the petitioner.