SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. KHANWILKAR, ABHAY S. OKA, C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
Narinder Singh and Others – Appellants
Versus
Divesh Bhutani and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 10294, 11000 of 2013, 8454 of 2014, 8173 of 2016, Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 1008, 1031, 1320 of 2021
Decided On : 21-07-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. scope of section 4 of plpa in context of land status. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. substantive legal arguments against land classification. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 3. judicial interpretation of forest classification. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 4. determination of land as forest under relevant laws. (Para 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69) |
JUDGMENT
ABHAY S. OKA, J.
1. The broad issue involved in these appeals and writ petitions is Whether a land covered under a special order issued by the Government of Haryana under Section 4 of the PUNJAB LAND PRESERVATION ACT , 1900 (for short “PLPA”) is a “forest land” within the meaning of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (for short “the 1980 FOREST ACT ”)?”
FACTUAL ASPECTS
2. Civil Appeal No. 10294 of 2013, Civil Appeal No. 8454 of 2014, Civil Appeal No. 8173 of 2016 and Civil Appeal No. 11000 of 2013 take exception to the orders passed by the National Green Tribunal (for short “the NGT”).
3. Civil Appeal No. 10294 of 2013 takes exception to the order dated 03rd May 2013 passed by the NGT in Original Application No. 42 of 2013. The said application was filed for inviting the attention of the NGT to the illegal non- FOREST ACT ivities of the encroachers on the lands bearing Khasra Nos. 1359, 1374 and 1378 of Village Anangpur Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad in the State of Haryana. The NGT passed the impugned order restraining the carrying on of any non- FOREST ACT ivities on the subject lands. The NGT proceeded on the footing that the lands at village Anangpur covered by the order dated 18th August 1992 issued under Section 4 of PLPA were forest lands within the meaning of the 1980 FOREST ACT . Before the said order dated 18th August 1992 was passed, a notification dated 10th April 1992 under Section 3 of PLPA was issued notifying the entire area covered by Ballabhgarh Tehsil of Faridabad District. The appellants are running marriage halls on the land subject matter of the said order dated 18th August 1992, issued under Section 4 of PLPA.
4. Civil Appeal No. 8173 of 2016 impugns the order dated 16th May 2016 passed by the NGT in Original Application No. 519 of 2015. In Original Application No. 519 of 2015, a prayer was made to stop the commercial and non- FOREST ACT ivities on the lands bearing Khasra No. 182 Min, RECT No. 61, Kila No. 19 (8-0), 20/1(0-7) and 22/2 (7-17) of Village Ankhir, Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad in the State of Haryana. The said lands were the subject matter of another order issued on 18th August 1992 by the Government of Haryana in the exercise of the power under Section 4 of PLPA in respect of certain lands in village Ankhir. The NGT held that the lands covered by the said order under Section 4 were forest lands within the meaning of the 1980 FOREST ACT .
5. Civil Appeal No. 11000 of 2013 takes exception to the same order dated 03rd May 2013 passed by the NGT in Original Application No. 42 of 2013, which is also the subject matter of challenge in Civil Appeal No. 10294 of 2013. The appellants claim to be the owners of a restaurant on the land subject matter of the order dated 18th August 1992, issued under Section 4 of PLPA.
6. Civil Appeal No. 8454 of 2014 also takes exception to the same order dated 03rd May 2013 of the NGT. The appellants therein are having marriage halls on the subject land.
7. The petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1031 of 2021 have invoked Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners claim to be the holders of the lands in Villages Anangpur, Ankhir and Mewla Maharajpur (for short “the said three villages”) in Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Faribadad in the State of Haryana. The lands held by th
Ambica Quarry Works v. State of Gujarat
B.S. Sandhu v. Government of India and Ors. (2014) 12 SCC 172 [Para 15]
Court on Its Own Motion v. State of Punjab
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors. (2008) 17 SCC 294 [Paras 15 & 53]
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors. (2004) 12 SCC 118 [Paras 15 & 53]
Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P. 1989 Supp1 SCC 504 [Para 37]
State of Bihar v. Banshi Ram Modi
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India and Ors. (1997) 2 SCC 267 [Paras 15 & 53]
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India and Ors. (2008) 16 SCC 401 [Para 15]
Lands cannot be classified as forest unless legally notified and proper procedures followed, invalidating requirements for governmental approval for non-forest activities.
State authorities are under obligation to enforce environmental laws and prevent unauthorized non-forest activities on preserved lands.
Point of law: Forest Land - doctrine of Public Trust is applicable to India. The doctrine of Public Trust requires the State to ensure that forests are protected
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.