Back
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
LAL AMAR NATH SAHDEO – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF JHARKHAND And ORS – Respondent
WPC/2462/2010
FOREST LAND - NOTIFICATION - FORGED DOCUMENT - WRIT JURISDICTION - [Section 29 (3) of Indian Forest Act, 1927]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the order of the Assistant Conservator of Forest declaring his land as notified forest area and the subsequent order of the Divisional Forest Officer directing him to vacate the land. The petitioner claimed that his land was released in 1956 and that the impugned orders were based on a forged document.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a serious dispute regarding the title of the petitioner's land and that the impugned orders did not propose any illegal or forcible eviction. The court also found that the petitioner had not produced the order which followed the issuance of the letter releasing his land in 1956.
Issues: 1. Whether the impugned orders were based on a forged document. 2. Whether the court could adjudicate on the disputed question of title under writ jurisdiction. 3. Whether the impugned orders proposed any illegal or forcible eviction.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the petitioner had not produced sufficient evidence to prove that the impugned orders were based on a forged document. 2. The court held that it could not adjudicate on the disputed question of title under writ jurisdiction. 3. The court held that the impugned orders did not propose any illegal or forcible eviction.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 2462 of 2010
Lal Amar Nath Sahdeo son of Lal Mangal Nath Sahdeo, resident of
village Kamta, P.O. and P.S. Chandwa, District Latehar
…
…
Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Government of
Jharkhand, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi
3. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, State of Jharkhand, P.O.
Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur District Ranchi
4. Conservator of Forest, Latehar Forest Division, Latehar P.O., P.S.
and District Latehar
5. Assistant Conservator of Forest, Latehar Forest Division, Latehar,
P.O., P.S. and District Latehar
6. Divisional Forest Officer, Latehar Forest Division, Latehar, P.O.,
P.S. and District Latehar
7. Forest Range Officer, Chandwa Forest Division Chandwa, District
Latehar, P.O. Chandwa, P.S. Chandwa, District Latehar.
…
… Respondents
---
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner
: Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate
: Ms. Apoorva Singh, Advocate
: Ms. Richa Lal, Advocate
For the Respondents
: Ms. Priti Priyamvada, Advocate
---
08/05.01.2023
Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioner.
2.
Heard Ms. Priti Priyamvada, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent – State.
3.
This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:
“For quashing the letter dated 26.10.2009 issued under the signature of the
Assistant Conservator of Forest, Latehar Forest Division contained in Annexure – 6 to
the writ petition by which the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Latehar Division has
illegally passed an order declaring the lands measuring an area of 8.50 acres of plot
no.140 of khata no.25 situated at village Arghe, P.O. and P.S. Chandwa, District
Latehar as notified forest area and for quashing the letter contained in Memo No.3548
dated 2.11.2009 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Latehar Forest Division
(Annexure – 7) informing the petitioner that the lands measuring an area of 8.50 acres
of plot no.140 of khata no.25 situated at village Arghe, P.O. and P.S. Chandwa,
District Latehar has been illegally released on the basis of forged documents and
direction has been given to the petitioner to release the encroached forest land and
order has been passed in colorable and sheer misuse of power without giving any
notice to the petitioner to file show cause and / or an opportunity of being heard
although the aforementioned land has already been released by the forest department
in the year 1956 and the same is cultivable land exclusively belonging to the petitioner
having acquired the same by virtue of a registered sale deed from its rightful owner
thereof and the petitioner further prays for a direction to the respondent authorities
restraining them from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over
the aforementioned land and for such other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is
legally entitled to.”
2
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is
aggrieved by Annexure – 6. He submits that the petitioner applied for no
objection certificate before the Divisional Forest Officer, Latehar, who vide
impugned order as contained in Annexure – 6 has not only refused to grant
no objection, but has also stated that the letter no.229 dated 16.05.1956, on
the basis of which the petitioner claims that his land was released, is a forged
and fabricated document. The learned counsel submits that he has produced
enough material to show that the land was released in favour of the petitioner
including a copy of Land Release Register which the petitioner has obtained
under RTI and filed through supplementary affidavit in which appropriate
entry has been made.
5.
The learned counsel submits that not only hi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
