Back
2012 Supreme(Kar) 276
High Court of Karnataka
VIKRAMAJIT SEN, A.S. BOPANNA
The Dy. Commissioner & Another
Versus
Gidda & Others
W.A. Nos.1453-1464 of 2005 (KLR-RES) c/w W.A.No. 1558 of 2007 (GM-FOR) & W.P.No. 9573 of 1999 (LR-PIL)
Decided on : 20-04-2012
For the Appellants:B. Veerappa, AGA, G. Lakshmeesh Rao, Advocate.
For the Respondents:A.S. Ponnanna, R1 & R2 -A.K. Subbaiah, Advocates.
Headnote:KARNATAKA FOREST ACT, 1963 - Sections 2(2), 33 & 106: [Vikramajit Sen, CJ & A.S. Bopanna, J] Grant of land out of Reserved Forest - Permissibility - Held, Revenue Authorities has no jurisdiction to make grants out of the reserve forests. Conservator of Forests was directed to take steps to evict all persons who are not entitled to remain in possession of the forest lands which is the subject matter of the Notification dated 6.3.1928.
KARNATAKA RENT ACT, 1999 - Section 39: [Vikramajit Sen, CJ & A.S. Bopanna, J] Grant of land - Inam Forest Land - converted to protected forest - On coming into force of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, the forest was known as Reserve Forest - Held, Revenue Authorities cannot grant any land out of reserve forest.
KARNATAKA (RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE) INAMS ABOLITION ACT, 1955 - Section 2: [Vikramajit Sen, C.J. & A.S. Bopanna, JJ] Forest land - Notification issued under Regulation 35 (iii) declaring said land to be ’reserved forest’ -Lands placed at disposal of Govt. under special protection. Intention of handing over possession to forest department was to protect same as forest - Notification not contrary to Regulations or without competence - Held, Merely because certain parties have acted contrary to the same would not take away its validity.
KARNATAKA (RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE) INAMS ABOLITION ACT, 1955 - Section 2: [Vikramajit Sen, C.J. & A.S. Bopanna, JJ] Inam forest land - Notification issued under Regn. 35 (iii) declaring said land to be ’reserved forest’ - Grant under Karnataka Land Grants Rules or such other grants under Karnataka Land Revenue Act - Held, Where a notification was issued under Regn. 35(iii) regarding inam forest lands which was claimed to be belonging to temple declaring such lands as reserved forest, and on coming into force of the Act 1963 it was to be considered as Reserved Forest, the Revenue Authorities had not jurisdiction to make any grant under the Karnataka Land Grants Rules or such other grants under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, more particularly after the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 had come into force on 25-10-1980 and hence the order evicting persons claiming to be tenants of such land would be liable to be evicted as Government was entitled to take possession in terms of S. 3(g) as the proviso of same would not provide protection as prima facie such person would not be entitled to be registered as the occupant or be continued as the tenant5 of the forest land, because the vesting in the Govt. would be as forest land and therefore subsequent to coming into force of Forest (conservation) Act, the land could not be granted without the approval of Central Govt. which has overriding effect over all other law. Moreover, it cannot be said that inam land cannot be forest land.
1. The writ petition in W.P.No.9573/1999 is filed by the petitioners claiming to be residents of Balehole, Chickmangalur District. The grant made by respondent Nos.4 and 5 viz., the Land Tribunal and the Land Reforms Appellate Authority respectively in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 18 under the Karnataka (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the KRCIA Act’ for short] is called in question.
2. The petitioners contend that the lands in question which were claimed by respondent Nos.7 to 18 as occupants for the purpose of grant on abolition of Inams did not continue to be Inam lands as on the date of the coming into force of the KRCIA Act. According to the petitioners, the land in question earlier belonged to Sri Kalasheshwara Swamy Temple, Kalasa, Mudigere Taluk, Chickmangalur District. Out of the total extent of 14357 acres, more than 10000 acres of land are thick forest land consisting of valuable trees and they are notified as ‘Reserved Forest’. It is their contention that except for the remaining extent of 4109 acres which remained to be Inam land wherein the grants could be made, the grant in the other extent which are forest land is not valid. It is in that context, contended that the forest lands are to be preserved by quashing the illegal orders of grant made in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 18. The private respondents have no doubt opposed the petition and have contended that the lands remained to be the Inam lands and after consideration of material, the grants have been made in their favour which according to them is valid.
3. In the background of the above petition, the Deputy Commissioner, Chickmagalur District had passed certain orders directing that the lands which were the subject matter in Writ Petition Nos.26882-26883/2001 connected with W.P.Nos. 26570-26575/2001, 26459/01, 26568/01, 26183/01, 24742-24743/01, 26608/01, 26494-26495/01. 27044/01, 36434-36452/01, 39542/01 be entered as forest land in the revenue records and directed the petitioners therein to handover vacant possession to the Forest Department. That led to the proceedings before the learned Single Judge. The reason for doing so was that according to the official respondents, the lands in question formed part of the land included in the notification dated 06.03.1928 issued under the Mysore Forest Regulation declaring the same as ‘Reserved Forest’. Some of the petitioners therein had challenged the order of the Deputy Commissioner, while few had challenged the show cause notices and the others challenged the notification dated 06.03.1928 itself. The learned Single Judge though did not find it necessary to quash the notification dated 06.03.1928, has held the lands in question to be Inam lands endowed to the deity. In that view, the learned Single Judge allowed certain of the writ petitions and quashed the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. In the other writ petitions, where notices had been issued by the Deputy Commissioner, the learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition and permitted the petitioners therein to file their reply. The Deputy Commissioner and the State of Karnataka being aggrieved are in appeal in W.A.Nos.1453-1464/2004.
4. The petitioner in W.P.No.28612/2003 against whom the order dated 29.05.2003 was passed by the Conservator of Forests-cum-Appellate Authority, Chickmagalur in Forest Appeal No.27/2001 affirming the order passed by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, had assailed the same. The said orders were passed alleging that the petitioner therein had encroached 45 acres 20 guntas of Mavinakere Thalangad Reserve Forest. The said Reserve Forest is also declared under the notification dated 06.03.1928. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition by order dated 06.06.2007. The petitioner therefore has filed the appeal in WA.No.1558/2007.
5. Though all the said proceedings have been initiated separately on different cause of action, the issue ultimately is
