Collateral challenges to settled administrative decisions are barred by the principle of finality and the doctrine of res judicata. Statutory forest rights do not confer an absolute veto over state-sanctioned mineral extraction, and failure to challenge foundational orders within a reasonable timeframe renders subsequent litigation non-maintainable.

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

21.04.2026

1. Heard Ms. Shalini Gera along with Mr. Akash Kundu and Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General assisted by Mr. Rishabh Singh Dev, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing for UOI / respondent Nos. 1 & 2, Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State / respondent Nos. 3 & 4 and Dr. Nirmal Shukla and Mr. Naman Nagrath, learned Senior Advocates assisted by Mr. Shailendra Shukla and Mr. Dinesh Bole, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 5 on I.A. No. 01 of 2026, which is an application for condonation of delay of 20 days in filing the instant appeal.

2. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 20 days in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned.

3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally.

4. This writ appeal is presented against the impugned order dated 08.10.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 1346 of 2016 (Hasdeo Arand Bachao Sangharsh Samiti Ghatbarra & Others vs. Union of India & others), whereby the writ petition filed by writ petitioners / appellants herein has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

5. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows :

(A) Initially, the Forest Rights Committee, Ghatbarra, through its President, Hasdeo Arand Bachao Sangharsh Samiti, and one Jainandan Singh Porte filed a writ petition before this Court being WPC No. 1346 of 2016. Petitioner No.1 moved an application for withdrawal of the writ petition on its behalf, and the same was allowed vide order dated 03.10.2024. Another application was moved for impleadment of six persons as members of Hasdeo Arand Bachao Sangharsh Samiti to pursue the matter, and the said application was allowed vide order dated 29.07.2025. Thus, the said petition was being contested by Petitioner No. 2 and Petitioner No. 3, Jainandan Singh Porte.

(B) Village Ghatbarra comprises mostly of the tribal population, and it was granted community forest rights under the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, [hereinafter to be referred to as “FR Act, 2006”]. In the year 2006-07, the Ministry of Coal, Government of India, allotted the Parsa East and Kete Basen captive coal block to Respondent No.5, a State of Rajasthan entity. The respondent No.5 applied for the diversion of forest land measuring 2388.525 hectares before the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India (MoEF) on 12.01.2009. The respondent No.5 submitted a revised proposal on 02.03.2011, whereby the forest area was reduced and mining was to be done in two phases.

(C) The aforesaid proposal was placed before the Forest Advisory Committee on 10.03.2011. The committee constituted a Sub-Committee to inquire and inspect, and then submit a report to the Committee. The Sub-Committee visited the proposed area on 14-15/05.2011 and submitted its report raising various issues such as the density of forest and the habitat of the wild animals, etc. The Sub-Committee also pointed out that provisions of the FR Act, 2006, are not within the knowledge of the villagers, and the provisions of the FR A