Sharad Kumar Gupta, J.

1. As identical point is involved in both the above Writ Appeals, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Challenge in these two appeals is levied to the orders dated 31.7.2017 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 954/2014 and Writ Petition (C) No. 953/2014 vide Annexure A-1 in both the appeals whereby and whereunder he dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants.

3. In brief, case of the appellants is that they have retired from the Indian Army and are landless persons. As per provisions of Clause 3-KH of Part-IV, No. 3 of the Chhattisgarh Revenue Book Circular, they are entitled for allotment of 5 acres non-irrigated land or 2.5 acres irrigated land. They filed separate applications for allotment of land in their native places. Gram Panchayat Faraswani and Gram Panchayat Sukhda passed resolutions of no objection that the lands in question may be given to appellants. Respondent No. 2 rejected the application filed by appellant Dharam Singh vide order dated 29.7.2008 and application of appellant Awadh Ram Chandra vide order dated 30.4.2007 (Annexure P-3 in both writ petitions). The appellants preferred two separate appeals before the Court of Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division. The Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division by orders dated 16.3.2011 vide Annexure P-2 affirmed the orders Annexure P-3 and dismissed the appeals of the appellants. The appellants then preferred separate revisions before the Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Raipur which by orders dated 23.10.2013 vide Annexure P-1 affirmed the orders Annexure P-2 and dismissed the revisions.

4. In brief, in WA No. 112/2018 case of the respondent No. 2 is that the subject matter of the land is reserved as Chhote Bade Jhad Ka Jungle and Grass. In Nistar Patrak, the land is not shown as agricultural land. It is an unoccupied land. The land may be allotted after change of its classification for public interest. The appellant is an encroacher in 3 acres of land.

5. In brief, in WA No. 120/2018 case of the respondent No. 2 is that the subject matter of the land is reserved as Chhote Jhad Ka Jungle and Grass. The land may be allotted after change of its classification for public interest.

6. Being aggrieved by the orders Annexure P-1 in both the writ petition, the appellants preferred the writ petitions which have been dismissed as aforesaid.

7. Shri Rajkamal Singh, Counsel for the appellants strenuously argued that as per the letters of Forest Divisional Officer, Janjgir Champa Forest Division, Champa, according to revenue record, the lands are not the reserved or protected forest, and no Chhote Bade Jhad Ka Jungle is present in the lands, thus there is no violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (in brevity ‘Act of 1980’) therefore, the orders Annexure P-3, Annexure P-2 and Annexure P-1 in both the appeals may be quashed.

8. Shri Prafull N. Bharat, Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents/ State argued that the impugned orders Annexure A-1 are in accordance with the legal provisions and do not suffer from any illegality hence, do not call for any interference.

9. In WA No. 112/2018, as per copy of the report of the Patwari Panchnama filed collectively as Annexure P-10, in the Misal Bandobast, Khasra No. 116/1 is recorded as grass land, in the Nistar Patrak it is recorded as grazing land, Chhote Jhad Ka Jungle is not present at the spot, in the Record of Right, the land is recorded as Chhote Jhad Ka Jungle and grass land.

10. In WA No. 120/2018, as per copy of the report of the Patwari Panchnama filed as Annexure P-6, Khasra No. 1699/1 is recorded as Grass Land. As per the memorandum vide Annexure P-7, in the Record of Right the land is recorded as Chhote Jhad ka Jungle and grass.

11. The letters of the Forest Divisional Officer, Janjgir Champa Forest Division, Champa vide Annexure P-12 and P-11 in respective petitions show that as per the revenue re