Back
2012 Supreme(Kar) 966
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Vikramajit Sen and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.
Alan Lobo S/o Gilbert Peter Aged about 65 years Brook Side Estate Darimane, Kalasa Post Mudigere Taluk Chikmagalur District —Appellant
Vs.
The conservator of Forests Cum appellate Authority Chikmaglur Circle Chikmaglur and The Deputy Conservator Forest Kalasa Sub-Division, Kalasa Chikmagalur District —Respondent
Writ Appeal Nos. 1453-1464 of 2005, 1558 of 2007 and 9573 of 1999
Decided on : 20-04-2012
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. B. Veerappa, AGA, Sri A.S. Ponnanna, Sri A.K. Subbaiah, Sri G. Lakshmeesh Rao, for the Appellant
Mr. A.S. Ponnanna, Mr. A.K. Subbaiah, Smt. Vaishali Hegde, Sri. M.H. Sawkar, Sri B. Veerappa, AGA, Sri N.S. Sangolli, Sri C.N. Kamath, Sri R. Gopal, Sri L.M. Sowraba Jeevala, Sri K. Govindaraj, Sri M. Aruna Shyam, Sri B.G. Sriram, for the Respondent
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that Revenue Authorities have no jurisdiction to make grants over forest lands, especially after the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 came into force. The court emphasized the need for compliance with the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 in cases involving forest lands.
Headnote:
KRCIA Act - Forest Lands - Section 35 (iii) of the Mysore Forest Regulations, 1900 - Notification dated 06.03.1928 - Summary of Acts and Sections
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a dispute over the grant made by the Land Tribunal and the Land Reforms Appellate Authority under the Karnataka (Religious and Charitable) Inams Abolition Act, 1955 (KRCIA Act) in favor of certain individuals claiming occupancy rights over forest lands. The petitioners contested the grants, arguing that the lands in question were Inam lands belonging to a temple and were protected forest lands under a notification dated 06.03.1928.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the lands in question were Inam Forest Lands and had become Protected Forest under the notification dated 06.03.1928. The court concluded that the Revenue Authorities had no jurisdiction to make any grants under the Karnataka Land Grants Rules or the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, especially after the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 came into force. The court also held that the grants made by the Revenue department in respect of Forest Lands were void and invalid and would not confer title to the land. The court directed the Conservator of Forests to evict all unauthorized occupants and take possession of the forest lands.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the validity of the grants made by the Land Tribunal and the Land Reforms Appellate Authority under the KRCIA Act, the jurisdiction of the Revenue Authorities to make grants over forest lands, and the applicability of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 35 (iii) of the Mysore Forest Regulations, 1900, the notification dated 06.03.1928, the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The court concluded that the lands in question were forest lands and that the Revenue Authorities had no jurisdiction to make grants over such lands. The court also emphasized the need for compliance with the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 in cases involving forest lands.
Final Decision: The court allowed certain writ petitions and appeals, set aside the orders of the learned Single Judge, and directed the Conservator of Forests to evict unauthorized occupants and take possession of the forest lands. The court dismissed an appeal and directed the Conservator of Forests to file an action taken report before the court.
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. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Though all the said proceedings have been initiated separately on different cause of action, the issue ultimat
