IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
State Of Kerala – Appellant
Versus
N.V.Vaidyanathan S/o. Venkiteswara Lyer – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The State of Kerala and the Conservator and Custodian of Ecologically Fragile Lands are in appeal, questioning the Final Order of the ‘Court of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Tribunal’, Palakkad, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short), in Original Application No.8/2014.
2. Through the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has allowed the Original Application filed by the respondents herein, thus declaring that the application schedule property – extending to 11.018 hectares comprised of in Resurvey No.791/2, 795, 797/2, 793/D2, d7, 793/3 and 797/9 in Pudussery Village – is not an ‘Ecologically Fragile Land’.
3. The genesis of the application made by the respondents is in Ext.B2 letter received by them from the Office of the Divisional Forest Officer, Palakkad (DFO), dated 20.06.2008, informing them that the application schedule property is an ‘Ecologically Fragile Land’ (EFL) and hence, vested with the Government. They, thereupon, filed the above said Application, seeking a declaration, as has now been allowed, on the ground, inter alia, that the property in question is a ‘Forest’, manifest by the





Government of Kerala and Another vs. Jacob Thomas Arikupuram and Others
The court affirmed that the property in question does not qualify as 'Ecologically Fragile Land' or 'Forest' under the Kerala Forest Act, based on the evidence presented.
The court clarified that a property exempted under the Vesting Act may still be classified as ecologically fragile under the EFL Act, emphasizing the need for evidence of cultivation as of the appoin....
The property in question did not meet the statutory definition of ecologically fragile land under the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003.
The court upheld that property not principally covered by trees cannot be classified as forest under the EFL Act, rejecting the State's claim regarding ecologically fragile land.
Under EFL Act, applicant has to prove that land is principally cultivated with long duration crops or is a plantation, or beneficial enjoyment for a building, which alone can exclude it from definiti....
'Forest', which speaks of lands which are principally covered with naturally grown trees and undergrowth and includes any recognized, declared, protected or otherwise forest land.
Property not 'forest' under EFL Act if principally planted teak; inadequate inspection requires remand.
The court upheld the Custodian's authority to review exemptions of ecologically fragile lands, emphasizing the need to prevent fraud and protect public interest.
The EFL Act requires a nature assessment of land as of the appointed date, not merely the intent to cultivate, to determine ecological status.
The classification of land as 'ecologically fragile' under the EFL Act is upheld when sufficient evidence supports the environmental status, and co-sharers have standing to appeal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.