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

2019 Supreme(All) 2561

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUDHIR AGARWAL, DINESH KUMAR SINGH-I, JJ.
M/s Ajay Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ C No. 27391 of 2019
Decided On : 11-09-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Devbrat Mukherjee.

Point of law: Once an order has been passed by Additional District Judge under Section 17 as an appellate authority, State Government has no power to alter the said decision by taking an administrative decision. In para-28 of the judgment, Court also considered the submission that so long as notification under Section 20 is not issued, State Government was entitled to take the land as not belonging to Forest department but to Revenue department and said that after issue of notification under Section 4, Section 5 comes into play and prohibition of accrual of any right operate after issue of notification under Section 4, hence no decision can be taken by State Government contrary to section 5 of Act, 1927

Headnote:

Indian Forest Act, 1927 – Sections 4, 5, 26, 52 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Writ of certiorari – Quashment of Order – Restriction under section 5 of Act, 1927 is applicable in respect of the land notified under section 4 and it has nothing to do with notification under Section 20 -

Facts of the case:

Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by sole petitioner, M/s Ajay Kumar, a Proprietary Firm of which Ajay Kumar Sharma is the proprietor. Relief sought in present petition is to issue a writ of certiorari quashing order which is an order passed by Regional Forest Officer, Dala Range, Obra Forest Range Division, Sonbhadra on a representation of petitioner dated 30.04.2019 which was submitted pursuant to order of this Court passed in Writ Petition – Representation has been rejected by RFO. –

Finding of the court:

It is admitted that Notification under Section 4 was already issued and thus Section 5 became operative – Counsel for petitioner admits that the land in question belong to Ravindra Kumar Singh who has already lost the matter before this Court and his writ petition has been dismissed while judgment of appellate authority i.e. Additional District Judge allowing review of the State Government has been affirmed and become final. – No activities other than activities of forest purpose can be carried out on the land in question in view of injunction under section 5 of Act, 1927. – The restriction under section 5 of Act, 1927 is applicable in respect of the land notified under section 4 and it has nothing to do with notification under Section 20. – This aspect has been dealt with in detail by this Court in writ petition in which the land in dispute, itself, was up for consideration and said judgment has become final. – Therefore, in no manner, petitioner can be allowed to carry on mining operation which is an activity not connected with forest purpose on the land in question, and thus, claim of petitioner in our view, has rightly been rejected by Collector/District Magistrate by the impugned order. –

Result: Writ Petition Dismissed

ORDER :

1. Heard Sri. Devbrat Mukherjee, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for State of U.P. and its Authorities.

2. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by sole petitioner, M/s Ajay Kumar, a Proprietary Firm of which Ajay Kumar Sharma is the proprietor. Relief sought in the present petition is to issue a writ of certiorari quashing order dated 27.07.2019, (Annexure No. 1 to Writ Petition) which is an order passed by Regional Forest Officer, Dala Range, Obra Forest Range Division, Sonbhadra (hereinafter referred as “RFO”) on a representation of petitioner dated 30.04.2019 which was submitted pursuant to order of this Court dated 24.04.2019 passed in Writ Petition No. 24530 of 2018. The Representation has been rejected by RFO.

3. Facts, in brief, as borne out from averments made by petitioner in petition as also the documents appended thereto are that there is a ‘Crusher’ plant established in Arazi No. 4478, Village, Billi, Markundi, Tehsil Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra.

4. In respect of Arazi No. 4478 (M), Area 2-0-0, one Ravindra Kumar Singh filed an application before Forest Settlement Officer (hereinafter referred as F.S.O.) registered as Case No. 243 of 1993. F.S.O. vide order dated 19.08.1993 recommended for exclusion of 2-0-0 area of plot no. 4478 (M) from the proposal of Reserve Forest.

5. Appeals against said order were taken Suo Moto by Additional District Judge, Obra, Sonbhadra, pursuant to Supreme Courts judgment in Banwasi Seva Ashram vs. State of U.P. and Others, (1986) 4 SCC 753. In Para 10 (2) and (3), Supreme Court had given directions as under:-

“(2) In regard to the lands notified under Section 4 of the Act, even where no claim has been filed within the time specified in the notification as required under Section 6(c) of the Act, such claims shall be allowed to be filed and dealt with in the manner detailed below:

(I) Within six weeks from December 1, 1986, demarcating pillars shall be raised by the Forest Officers of the State Government identifying the lands covered by the notification under Section 4 of the Act. The fact that a notification has been made under Section 4 of the Act and demarcating pillars have been raised in the locality to clearly identify the property subjected to the notification shall be widely publicized by beat of drums in all the villages and surrounding areas concerned. Copies of notices printed in Hindi in abundant number will be circulated through the Gram Sabhas giving reasonable specifications of the lands which are covered by the notification. Sufficient number of inquiry booths would be set up within the notified area so as to enable the people of the area likely to be affected by the notification to get the information as to whether their lands are affected by the notification, so as to enable them to decide whether any claim need be filed. The Gram Sabhas shall give wide publicity to the matter at their level, Demarcation, as indicated above, shall be completed by January 15, 1987. Within three months therefrom, claims as contemplated under Section 6(c) shall be received as provided by the statute.

(II) Adequate number of record officers shall be appointed by December 31, 1986. There shall also be five experienced Additional District Judges, one each to be located at Dudhi, Muirpur, Kirbil of Dudhi Tehsil and Robertsganj and Tilbudwa of Robertsganj Tehsil. Each of these Additional District Judges who will be spared by the High Court of Allahabad, would have his establishment at one of the places indicated and the State shall provide the requisite number of assistants and other employees for their efficient functioning. The learned Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court is requested to make the services of five experienced Additional District Judges available for the purpose by December 15, 1986 so that these officers may be posted at their respective stations by the first of January, 1987. Each of those Additiona

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