Civil courts cannot grant title or possession regarding land notified as protected forest, as such property vests in the State. Additionally, claims for legal settlement status are invalid if mandatory administrative criteria regarding population and housing density are not fulfilled.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.C. Sarma, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B.C. Talukdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and Mr. I. Imsong, the learned Additional Advocate General, Nagaland appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

2. The present Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 22.02.2016 passed by the learned Court of the District and Sessions Judge, Dimapur, Nagaland (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Civil Suit No. 3/2009 whereby the said suit of the Appellant was dismissed.

3. The Appellant as Plaintiff had filed a suit being Civil Suit No. 3/2009 before the learned Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dimapur at Nagaland.

4. It is the case of the Plaintiff in the said suit that in the year 1972, the Defendant Nos. 3 and 4 disturbed the peaceful possession of the Village land in the Thilixu Village. The Head G.B. of the said Thilixu Village filed a suit being Title Suit No. 13/1973 before the learned Court of the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur seeking declaration of their right and title over the Village land and for injunction restraining the Government of Nagaland and other officers under the State. The said suit was decreed by the learned Court of the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur in favour of the Head G.B., Hevikhu Sema and others vide the Judgment and Order dated 08.07.1979 declaring the right and title over the suit land and permanently restrained the Defendants in the suit from evicting the Plaintiff from the suit land. There was an Appeal filed thereagainst, but nothing has been mentioned in the plaint as regards what happened in the said Appeal.

5. Be that as it may, the said Thilixu Village established a new Village in the name of Thilixu-B Village on 16.01.2001 with specific boundaries. It is mentioned in the plaint that in terms with the Agreement dated 16.09.2000 executed between the Plaintiff and the Head G.B. and Chairman of the original Thilixu Village, the boundary of the new Thilixu-B Village was outside the notified area of the Rangapahar Reserved Forest and Zoological Park. It is further mentioned in the plaint that the Government of Nagaland vide Notification dated 17.06.1986 had declared an area of 470 hectares of land as Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary and the Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary was outside the boundary of Thilixu-B Village.

6. On 02.12.2003, a notice was issued by the In-Charge of the Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary claiming the land of the Plaintiff Village to be under the notified area as earmarked for establishing the Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary/Zoological Park. Thereafter, in the month of January, 2005, the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur issued an order permitting the Forest Department to undertake development works on the land in possession of the Thilixu-B Village.

7. The Plaintiff, being aggrieved by such actions taken by the In-Charge of the Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary/Zoological Park, as well as by the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, filed 2 (two) writ petitions before this Court which were registered and numbered as WP(C) No. 8(K)/2004 and WP(C) No. 23(K)/05 and one C.M.C. No. 89(K)/05 against the Defendants challenging the order dated 02.12.2003 issued by the In-Charge, Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuary as well as the order issued in the month of January, 2005 by the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur perm