Read Time: 07 minutes

Dealing with a case where a hillock earmarked as communal land on revenue records was being allotted by the State Government to homeless poor for home construction, the Andhra Pradesh High Court observed, "India being a democratic republic, it is not open to the Government of the day to arbitrarily give away hills and hillocks for exploitation.”

Stating that “Unless there are supervening public interest considerations, hills and hillocks cannot be given away as house site to houseless poor,” the bench of Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy declared State Government's such action as illegal and arbitrary. 

Court further directed the Tahsildar of the area not to allot house sites to houseless beneficiaries on the Yetteramma Gutta hillock of Kuntrapakam Village, Tirupati Rural Mandal under the Navaratnalu-Pedalandariki Illu (Home for all the poor) or any other scheme.

Emphasizing the importance of the preservation of Mountain ecosystems, the court held that Kuntrapakam Village is a hillock and the same is required to be protected. 

Court said, "In view of the effect on bio-diversity and ecologically it is necessary to preserve such mountains as it will have its impact on the climatic conditions."

Discussing at length the vital role which mountains play to maintain ecological balance, the court stated that the act of the respondents (State Government officials) proposing to allot part of the hillock i.e. mountain was having a lot of effect on biodiversity and ecosystem.

Therefore, pointing out the lack of stringent legislation in this regard, the court said that though no law for preservation of mountains is adopted in the country except Forests Conservation Act, in terms of Articles 48-A and 51-A(g) of the Constitution, it is the duty of the State to protect and improve the environment.

Court also noted that in the present case, the hillock was being allotted to 300 beneficiaries and this action besides being detrimental to the mountain ecosystem, was also an infringement of the rights of the nearby residents. 

It was contended before the court by the petitioners, two environmental activists, that the land in question was classified as "gutta poramboke‟  and a communal land in revenue records which consists of several temples of different deities. 

The petitioners had averred that the local public visits the above said temples for offering their prayers, more particularly during festival occasions, large number of people would attend those temples. They had said that apart from holding cultural importance, the concerned land was also used for grazing cattle for the last many decades by the people of the surrounding village.

Therefore, the petitioners had argued that if the land in question would have been allotted for house construction, rights of the surrounding neighborhood would be violated. 

Court also agreed with petitioners these averments. Court observed, "the classification of the land for communal purpose is an undisputed fact.When the land is reserved for communal purpose, every member of community is entitled to enjoy / use the land meant for communal purpose."

Court, therefore, held, "The petitioners being members of community are entitled to claim the relief as their right is likely to be infringed in the event of allotment of house site in the subject property."

With aforesaid observations, the court disposed of the matter. 

Case Title: Smt. S. Maheswari v. The State of Andhra Pradesh