SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Del) 90

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
JAYANT NATH, J.
Bari Bhati And Chhoti Bhati Resident Welfare Association And Ors – Appellant
Versus
Govt Of NCT Of Delhi And Ors - Respondents
W.P.(C) 11079 of 2019, CM Nos.45672-673 of 2019 & 48686-687 of 2019
Decided on : 24-03-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.Ravi Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Pankaj Vivek and Ms.Bidyarani, Advocates For the Respondent:Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC with Ms.Shivani Vij and Ms.Dacchita Shahi, Advocates

Point of Law: cow-herding - Claim of rights in land - a person who has for the last three generations resided in the forest land and depend on the forest for their bonafide livelihood needs - a person who has for the last three generations resided in the forest land and depend on the forest for their bonafide livelihood needs

Headnote:

Indian Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 4, 6 , 20 , 35, 2(o), 3 and 2(d) - East Punjab Holding (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 - section 18 - Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 - Section 154 - Nature of mandamus - traditional herder community engaged in cow-herding - Economy of the village was primarily dependent upon forest produce as cattle and sheep were dependent upon forest produce - Case of petitioners occupants of Extended Lal Dora Abadi of Village are all original inhabitants who have descended from a common ancestor - Village was allegedly settled by Ram - inhabitants of the village tribe which is a traditional herder community engaged in cow-herding and sheep rearing - Only a small portion of land of village was cultivated to grow grain for sale/consumption –

Finding of the Court:

Writ petition raises several pleas to claim rights in the land - Petitioners claim they have settled in the said land for generations, and have rights in the said lands - None of these rights were claimed or asserted in any manner whatsoever for decades till the bulldozers arrived at the site - Pleas of the petitioners cannot even otherwise be accepted on account of delay and laches - There is no merit in the petition

Result: Petition is dismissed

JUDGMENT :

JAYANT NATH, J.

1. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

    “(a) Call for the records from the respondents w.r.t. Extended Lal Dora Abadi of Village Bhati, Tehsil Saket, Distt. South, New Delhi as depicted in the layout plan filed by the petitioner no. 1 with the application for regularization dated 20.08.2013 bearing no.181/ALD/UD (Annexure P-l);

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other or similar writ or direction thereby commanding the respondents to maintain status quo as existing on 01.06.2014 in respect of the Extended Lai Dora Abadi of Village Bhati, Tehsil Saket, Distt. South, New Delhi as depicted in the layout plan filed by the petitioner no. 1 with the application for regularization dated 20.08.2013 bearing no.181/ALD/UD in accordance with the provisions of The National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2011 (as amended upto date);

(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other or similar writ or direction thereby commanding the respondents to settle the rights of the petitioners as "other traditional forest dwellers" in accordance with The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (No. 2 of 2007); and

(d) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other or similar writ or direction thereby quashing the notice/order dated 19.05.2018 (bearing F.No.SDM(Saket)/GS/Forest/ 2018/ 1954) issued by the respondent no. 4 in relation to Extended Lai Dora Abadi of Village Bhati, Tehsil Saket, Distt. South, New Delhi as depicted in the layout plan filed by the petitioner no. 1 with the application for regularization dated 20.08.2013 bearing no.181/ALD/UD.”

2. It is the case of the petitioners that the occupants of Extended Lal Dora Abadi of Village Bhati are all original inhabitants who have descended from a common ancestor. The village Bhati was allegedly settled by one Sh.Garib Ram in 1620 AD. The inhabitants of the village Bhati are of Gurjar tribe which is a traditional herder community engaged in cow-herding and sheep rearing. Only a small portion of the land of village Bhati was cultivated to grow grain for sale/consumption. The economy of the village was primarily dependent upon forest produce as cattle and sheep were dependent upon forest produce. Since time immemorial, the lands of revenue estate of village Bhati were recorded in the name of Shamilat Deh (i.e. a body comprising of the proprietors of the Village). Most of the land was used for pasture and grazing as it was hilly land consisting of shrubs and small trees. It is stated that after the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 was enacted, the Shamilat lands vested in the Gaon Sabha and the cultivated lands were declared as Bhumidhari of the tillers/villagers. This village is the last village situated on the border of Delhi adjacent to the Asola Wildlife Sanctuary and it continues to have the status of a forest village.

3. It is stated that over years population of inhabitants of village Bhati multiplied. Therefore, there was no alternative for the villagers but to build their houses on the common lands situated adjoining to the Old Lal Dora Abadi. It is claimed that this was a natural organic growth of village abadi and the residents of village abadi only consisted of the original inhabitants of the village. It is claimed that Extended Lal Dora Abadi of the village Bhati is under process of regularisation as it is to be treated as natural extension of village abadi.

4. It is also claimed that village Bhati is a unique village in Delhi which is situated in a forested area of Aravali hills and all villagers enjoy the status of “Other Traditional Forest Dwellers” as defined in The Schedule Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. The petitioners and other villagers have a right to reside in the forest area and to utilize the forest produce,

                      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                      1
                      2
                      3
                      4
                      5
                      6
                      7
                      8
                      9
                      10
                      11
                      Judicial Analysis

                      SupremeToday

                      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                      supreme today icon
                      logo-black

                      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                      Please visit our Training & Support
                      Center or Contact Us for assistance

                      qr

                      Scan Me!

                      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                      whatsapp-icon Back to top