Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 22840
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, MR. SHAJI P.CHALY, J
STATE OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
T.P.UNNIKRISHNAN – Respondent
WA NO. 1683 OF 2021 | WP(C) 10460/2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, SRI. SHYAM PADMAN
The court upheld that historical ownership and constitutional rights protect land from arbitrary classification as forest land, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of ecological status when applying conservation laws.
Headnote:(A) Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 - The statutory framework that restricts the dereservation of forests and usage of forest land for non-forest purposes - The court discusses the definition of 'forest' and relevant provisions addressing property rights under Articles 300A and 21 of the Constitution of India. (Paras 1, 10, 18)
(B) Principle of finality and ownership - Constitutional rights regarding property and the issue of expropriation, discussed in the context of wild growth on land and previous legal battles concerning the property. (Paras 9, 20)
(C) Judicial reviews and appellate jurisdiction - Findings of lower courts are to be respected unless a clear error or illegality is demonstrated in the decision-making process. (Paras 12, 18)
Facts of the case:
The writ petitioners owned land that had been under dispute with the State regarding its classification as forest land. Despite previous court decisions favoring the petitioners, the appellants issued a notice claiming the land fell under the Act, 1980, restricting its use.
Findings of Court:
The Court affirmed the single judge’s decision to quash the notice based on the petitioners’ constitutional rights and the history of the land’s litigation, determining that it could not be classified as 'forest land' under the applicable laws.
Issues: Whether the land in question was correctly classified as forest land under the Act, 1980, and whether the respondents' notice was legally valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that historical use and ownership rights must be considered, together with constitutional protections for property, leading to the conclusion that past obstructions caused natural growth, but did not convert the land into forest as defined by law.
Result: Writ appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and historical context of property ownership (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. legal arguments regarding notifications and land rights (Para 5 , 10) |
| 3. judicial observations on property use and rights (Para 9 , 12 , 14 , 16) |
| 4. legal definitions surrounding forest lands (Para 13 , 17 , 21) |
| 5. concluding remarks on jurisdiction and rights (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P. CHALY.
The State and the Divisional Forest Officer, Palakkad Division, who were respondents in the writ petition, have filed this writ appeal challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 30.03.2021 in W.P.(C) No. 10460 of 2019, whereby the learned single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed Ext. P11 notice dated 07.01.2019 issued by the second appellant i.e., the Divisional Forest Officer, Palakkad Division informing that the land in possession of the writ petitioners is a forest land to which the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 ('Act, 1980' for short) applies; that they are not entitled to destruct or damage any tree or undergrowth or other vegetation in the above land and; and that they are not entitled to undertake any non forest activity, including agricultural operation, cultivation, clearing undergrowth etc. except with the prior approval of the Central Government.
2. Brief material facts for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:
The writ petitioners are the owners in possession of a total extent of 9.60 acres of property situated in resurvey No. 11/4 of Ongallur I village, by virtue of the assignment deed Nos. 1970/2004, 1971/2004, 1972/2004 and 1973/2004 of the Office of the Sub Registrar, Pattambi, Palakkad District. The subject property has a checkered history though only in the year 2004, writ petitioners had purchased the properties from the successors in interest of one late Raman Nair, who had obtained properties having a total extent of 12.67 acres under a partition deed of the year 1970. In the partition deed, the properties are described as 'parambas' and 'garden land' and the properties were also being cultivated with crops like modan, tapioca, vegetables etc. and even as per the village records, the lands were classified as occupied lands.
3. While so, in the year 1975, the Forest officials obstructed the predecessor in title of the property of the writ petitioners from cultivating the land stating that it was vested forest land coming within the purview of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 ('Act, 1971' for short), which was successfully challenged by the predecessor in title of the property before the Forest Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 82 of 1975, whereby the Tribunal held that the properties come under the exempted category under Section 3(2) of the Act, 1971. Even though the State has preferred an appeal, MFA No. 273 of 1978, it was dismissed by this Court as per Ext. P2 judgment dated 23.06.1982. Pursuing the battle, the State preferred RP No. 190 of 1984 to review the said judgment, but it also was dismissed by this Court as per Ext. P3 order dated 08.11.1983. Thus, on 14.07.1997, the land was restored back to the successors in interest of the late Raman Nair. Thereafter, on 02.01.2001, the property was notified under the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Ordinance.
4. While so, the legal heirs of late Raman Nair sold an extent of 9.60 acres of land to the writ petitioners as per the deeds specified above. Thereupon, the Forest officials obstructed the writ petitioners from cultivating the property and it was accordingly on enquiry they came to know that the properties were notified as ecologically fragile land. Being aggrieved by the said notification, the writ petitioners approached the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Tribunal under Section 10 of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 ('Act, 2003' for short) for declaring that the properties belonging to them ar
