National Green Tribunal
Putta Sudhakar Yadav vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 September, 2022
Bench: K Ramakrishnan, K. Satyagopal
Item No.2: Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No. 195 of 2020 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
PuttaSudhakar Yadav
S/o. PuttaSubbaiah
Aged about 56 years
Ex. Chairman, T.T. Devasthanams Board
D.No.3/483, Y.M.R. Colony,
Park Road, Proddatur, Kadapa District,
Andhra Pradesh.
... Applicant(s)
Versus
The Chief Secretary
State of Andhra Pradesh
Building #1, 1st Floor,
Interim Government Complex
A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 503 and Ors.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): Mr. Syed Sardar.
For Respondent(s): Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R1, R2 & R4 to R7.
Dr. Akula Kishan for R3.
Mrs. M. Sumathi for R8.
Judgment Pronounced on: 02nd September 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
ORDER
Judgment pronounced through Video Conference. The original application is disposed of with directions vide separate Judgment.
Pending interlocutory application, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, E.M. O.A. No.195/2020 (SZ), 02nd September 2022. Mn.
Page 1 of 24 Item No.2: Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No. 195 of 2020 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
PuttaSudhakar Yadav
S/o. PuttaSubbaiah
Aged about 56 years
Ex. Chairman, T.T. Devasthanams Board
D.No.3/483, Y.M.R. Colony,
Park Road, Proddatur, Kadapa District,
Andhra Pradesh.
... Applicant(s)
Versus
1) The Chief Secretary
State of Andhra Pradesh
Building #1, 1st Floor,
Interim Government Complex
A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 503.
2) The Special Chief Secretary
EFS&T,
AranyaBhavan, K.M. Munshi Road,
Nagarampalem, Guntur - 522 004.
Andhra Pradesh.
3) Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Head of Forest Force) State of Andhra Pradesh AranyaBhavan, K.M. Munshi Road, Nagarampalem, Guntur - 522 004.
4) The Principal Secretary Revenue Department State of Andhra Pradesh A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 503.
5) The District Collector Y.S.R. District Ganagapeta, Kadapa Andhra Pradesh - 516 001.
6) The Divisional Forest Officer Modameedipalle, Proddattur, Andhra Pradesh - 516 362.
7) The Mandal Revenue Officer Mydukur Mandal Mydukur - Badvel Road S.Mydukur, Andhra Pradesh - 516 172.
Page 2 of 248) Union of India Through its Secretary Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change Indira Paryavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi - 110 003.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): Mr. Syed Sardar.
For Respondent(s): Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R1, R2 & R4 to R7.
Dr. Akula Kishan for R3.
Mrs. M. Sumathi for R8.
Judgment Reserved on: 22nd August 2022.
Judgment Pronounced on: 02nd September 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER Whether the Judgment is allowed to be published on the Internet - Yes.
Whether the Judgment is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter - Yes.
JUDGMENT Delivered by Justice K. Ramakrishnan, Judicial Member
1. This case pertains to alleged illegal encroachment of Reserve Forest area in Survey Nos. 506/B and 507 of Nandyalampet Village, S. Mydukur Mandal, Y.S.R. District, State of Andhra Pradesh within the jurisdiction of Proddatur Division, Proddatur Range, Nagasanipalli Beat, 90-Compartment by the political sympathises of a particular political party to a tune of 304.00 Acres, out of which 104.00 Acres of land was fenced with iron wire rope and pre-cast cement plates.
2. The above said reserve forest is called as "Lankamalla Reserved Forest" and a Wildlife Sanctuary area which is specially known as "Tiger Corridor" and the said Reserved Forest area is spreading from Srisailam Nallamalla Forest to Tirupati Sheshachalam Forest and it is very sensitive and restricted movements of men and vehicles were introduced between 09:00 p.m. and 06:00 a.m. Page 3 of 24
3. It is further alleged in the application that the total extent was under
a micro irrigation system with power lines for two bore wells, photographs of which were produced as Annexure - 1. It was also alleged that certain pipelines were also laid after digging bore-wells in the area.
4. According to the applicant, the person who has said to have trespassed into the reserved forest, setup homesteads and plough up and is growing mango orchard and they are randomly cutting trees, burning the bushes and littering the areas which are evidenced from the Google maps, a copy of which was produced as Annexure - 2.
Several letters have been sent to the District Collector and other authorities to take action against those persons who have trespassed into the forest area invoking the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967.The copy of the representation so sent is produced as Anuexure-3. As per the revenue records, Sy. Nos. 506-B& 507, Khata Nos. 20000401 of Nandyalampet Village, S.Mydukur Mandal, Y.S.R District, State of Andhra Pradesh is shown as reserved forest, evidenced by Annexure- 4/Adangal Extract. The nature of encroachments made and fencing done were evident from the photographs produced as Annexure-5. This was widely published in newspapers, evidenced by Annexure- 6/Paper clippings.
5. Though complaints were made to the authorities, no action was taken due to the influence of the parties who are in possession of the same under the support of the certain political parties.
6. So, the applicant had no other remedy except to approach this Tribunal seeking the following reliefs:-
a) Direct the Respondent authorities to maintain the Reserved Forest lands free from encroachments and any trespasses.
b) Direct the respondent authorities to take all steps to ensure that the Reserved Forest Lands are safe from illegal occupiers and is free for move mot of wild animals;
c) Issue an order to constitute a high level committee to monitor the Reserved Forest Lands to protect from the land grabbers and submit periodical reports to this Hon‟ble Tribunal.
7. As per order dated 12.10.2020, this Tribunal directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests &Head of Forest Force, State of Andhra Pradesh to submit a status report regarding the allegations made in the application and the action taken, if there is any violation of forest Page 4 of 24 laws, apart from directing the State-respondents to file their independent response. Thereafter, the matter has been adjourned from time to time by successive notification to enable the parties to file their independent statements, apart from the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to file their report as directed by this Tribunal.
8. The 3rd respondent filed counter on their behalf and on behalf of the 2nd respondent contending that the lands in Survey No. 506-B and 507 situated at Nandyalampet village are classified as „Forest‟ as per RSR of Nandyalampet Village, Mydukur Mandal. As per Adangal downloaded from Meebhoomi portal, the above lands are shown as „Reserve Forest‟. These are not notified forests. These survey numbers are not part of notified Reserve Forest in Nagasanipalli Beat of Proddatur Range, Proddatur (WL) Division and hence, they are not under the control of Forest Department for its protection and conservation, evidenced by Annexure 1 & 2 produced along with the counter. The lands in question are under the control of Revenue Department, who have to initiate appropriate remedial measures. Survey Nos.506-B and 507 of Nandyalampet Village do not fall under the notified forest lands. A joint survey of Forest, Revenue and Survey & Land Records is proposed to be taken up to assess the status, as these lands are adjacent to Lankamalla Reserve Forest notified under Section 16 of Madras Forest Act, 1882, evidenced by Annexure - 4 and Machupalli Forest Block under Section 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, evidenced by Annexure - 5. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
9. The 6th respondent filed counter affidavit reiterating the contention that these lands are not a notified reserved forest, but they areshown as forest as per the revenue records under the control of Revenue Department. As per Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980,it not only covers Reserved Forest, Protected Forest but also any area recorded as forest in the Government Records and any proposal for diversion of such areas to any non-forest purpose, even if the area is privately owned, would require the prior approval of the Central Government. Trespass into the said survey numbers were not known to the Forest Department, as they are not coming within the control of Forest Department. It is for the Revenue Department to Page 5 of 24 take necessary action. It was further contended that a joint survey is proposed by the Forest, Revenue and Survey & Land to ascertain as to whether it is falling within the notified forest or reserved forest and if it is found to be a reserved forest, as per the revenue records, then action will be taken against those persons who are unauthorizedly occupying the same as per law. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
10. The 5th Respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations that Survey No.506/B and 507 having an extent of 38.94 Acres and 267.56 Acres respectively of Nandyalampet Village, Mydukur Mandal are recorded as 'Reserved Forest' but as per the revenue records, it was recorded as „Forest‟. It was not vested with the Forest Department, as they were not notified under the relevant provisions of the Forest Act and the Forest Department also filed a counter to that extent. The Joint Inspection report consisting of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu, the Divisional Forest Officer, Proddatur (WL) Division, the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Kadapa and the Tahsildar, Mydukur dated 07.08.2021 gave a finding that the subject areas are not notified as "Reserve Forest"
and also not part of „Lankamalla Reserve Forest‟ or part of „Tiger Corridor‟. So, the assumption of the applicant that it is a forest land comes under 90-Compartment of Nagasanipalli Beat, Proddatur Range, Proddatur Division, YSR District, Andhra Pradesh is not sustainable. The said Joint Inspection report of the above officials revealed that 116 temporary D-Pattas were issued by the then MRO, Mydukur to the SC people. In the said Survey No.507, cultivation is found in 137.00 Acres under rain fed crops. Guava, Sapota crop in 2.00 Acres and Mango cultivation in 6.83 Acres. 3 Bore wells are existing in the said survey number and only 6.53 Acres is covered with barbed wire fencing in Survey No.507 of Vibhavapuram Village is existing adjacent to the lands in Survey No. 507. Further, the Joint Inspection report reveals that in the Adangals for Fasli Nos. 1406, 1412, 1415 and 1416, the land was entered as "Forest" and the names of certain Ryots has been entered as enjoyers (encroachers). Many SC/ST/BC people of Jangamrajupalli Village of B.Mattam Mandal which is adjacent to Mydukur Mandal had been displaced from the village due to formation of Brahmamsagar Reservoir. As they are landless poor people and displaced people and Page 6 of 24 as this land in the Survey No. 507 of Nandyalampet Village is vacant and fit for cultivation and it is very near to Nandyalampet Village and adjacent to the forest, these landless poor displaced persons and some other people from Mydukur Mandal were cultivating the lands in Survey No. 506/B of Nandyalampet Village since long back and they were raising crops every year for the last 20 years. To facilitate these landless poor people with assignments, the then District Collector on the request of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu had issued instructions dated 30.12.2004 to submit de-reservation proposals along with the details of the land identified for compensatory afforestation for onward submission to the Government through the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Andhra Pradesh for further course of action and in the meanwhile, permitted the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu to issue conditional provisional patta to the eligible persons by following due process of law. Accordingly, the then Tahsildar, Mydukur issued temporary Dara Kastu (DKT) land Pattas based on the eligibility of the beneficiaries for the landless poor persons who are depending on agriculture and the same are purely temporary DKT Pattas and they are in possession and enjoyment of the same and cultivating since so many years. The allegations contra made are false and imaginary. They also reiterated the contention that though it was shown as Forest in the Revenue records, they are not notified as Reserved Forest as per the records. It will be rectified as per the procedure and approval of the competent authorities at the earliest, as necessary instructions were already issued to the Tahsildar, Mydukur accordingly. The Forest Officials also agreed that the same was not notified as Reserve Forest. The Revenue Officials gave only temporary DKT pattas with an intention that the cultivation being done by landless and poor people should not suffer, being poor as they are in possession and enjoyment of the same since long time by raising seasonal rain fed crops. In further course of action, the then Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu also made a request on 31.03.2012 to accord permission for eventual assignment to the landless eligible persons under Dharakast Rules as on grounds of sivaijama cultivation going on since long time and RSR shows the said land as "Forest"
only and not "Reserve Forest". Correspondence was made by this office to the Principal Chief Conservation of Forest, Hyderabad in Ref No.E6/3277/2010, dated 31.03.2012 for change of classification of Page 7 of 24 land for grant of eventual assignment to the landless poor for their livelihood. In this regard, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Hyderabad in RC.No.15116/2012-JI, dated 10.05.2012 had clarified that not to change the classification of the subject lands, as classification of any land recorded as "Forest" in the revenue records will amount to violation of Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in T.N. Godhavarman‟s case. Hence, the then District Collector vide Ref. No. E6/3277/2010, dated 31.07.2012 requested the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu to identify alternate land in Mydukur area in consultation with the Divisional Forest Officer, Proddatur to allot the land to the Forest Department under compensatory afforestation and submit proposals for taking further action. The Tahsildar, Mydukur is under the said process for identification of alternate land. The allegation contrary made that it was a recent trespass under the political influence etc. are made with some ulterior motive. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
11. The 8th Respondent filed counter contending that the land is the subject matter of the State Government and forest area and the forest legal boundaries thereof are determined and maintained by the concerned State Government. Inter alia, being the repository of land records, State Government has the primary responsibility to determine status of any parcel of land, giving due regards to gazette notifications, provisions under State and Central Acts and concerned judgments and directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. For the conservation of forests and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto, the Parliament in the 31stYear of the Republic of India enacted the Forest(Conservation) Act, 1980 which came into force on 25th October, 1980 and Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 deals with the procedure for conversion of forest land for non-forest purpose where it has been mentioned that the land coming under this Act is reserve forest/protected forest or land shown as forest in the revenue records and they will have to obtain necessary permission from the concerned authorities under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for conversion of such forest land for non-forest purpose. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P.No.202/1995 passed an interim order dated 12.12.1996 by issuing explicit Page 8 of 24 directions for cessation of all non-forestry activities going on in forest area without prior approval of Central Government. The Apex Court vide order referred to above has stated that the word "Forest" must be understood according to its dictionary meaning and also the term "forest land' occurring in Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 will not only include forest as understood in the dictionary sense, but also any area recorded as forest in the Government records irrespective of ownership or classification thereof. The MoEF&CC vide letter F.No. FC/IRO-VIJ/FCA/NGT/55-03/2021/96 dated 03.12.2021 has requested the PCCF, Andhra Pradesh to furnish the factual status as of now, on the ownership & possession and legal status of the land under question in this case, evidenced by Annexure - R1. The PCCF, HoFF, Andhra Pradesh vide letter No. EFS02-22021/2020-WLR-2 dated 14.12.2021/Annexure - R2 submitted the following documents;
"a. Counter Affidavit filed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forest Force, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur before this Tribunal.
b. Joint Survey and inspection report dated12.05.2021 of the Forest and Revenue Departments in Sy. No.506 B & 506 of Nandyalampet Village of Mydukur Mandal of YSR Kadapa District received from the Divisional Forest Officer, Proddatur (WL) Division.
c. Joint Survey and inspection report dated 07.08.2021 of the Forest, Revenue and Survey Departments in Sy. No.506 B & 506 of Nandyalampet Village of Mydukur Mandal of YSR Kadapa District received from the Divisional Forest Officer, Proddatur (WL) Division."
12. After scrutiny of the documents submitted by the PCCF, HoFF, Andhra Pradesh, it is revealed that the legal status of the area under question viz., Sy. No.506 B & 507 of Nandyalampet Village of Mydukur Mandal of YSR Kadapa District is reported / recorded differently i.e. as "Forest" in RSR and "Reserved Forest" as per Adangal downloaded from Meebhomi Portal of Andhra Pradesh and as per the Forest Department records, the area in question are "not part of any Notified „Reserve Forest‟ and also not part of Lankamalla Reserve Forest or Part of Tiger Corridor". The Integrated Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Vijayawada vide letter No. IRO/VIJ/FCA/NGT/55-03/2021/107 dated 21.12.2021 sought a clarification from the PCCF& HoFF, Andhra Pradesh to clarify whether the land under question is a deemed forest as per the order, dated 12.12.1996 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the W.P. (Civil) No.202/1995 in the matter of T.N.Godavarman ThirumulpadVs. Union of India, evidenced by Annexure R3. The Page 9 of 24 PCCF, HoFF, Andhra Pradesh vide letter No. EFS02-22021/3/2020- WLR-2 dated 26.12.2021 informed that the land in question i.e. Sy. No.506 B & 507 of Nandyalampet Village which is classified as "Forest" as per RSR of Nandyalampet Village of Mydukur Mandal of YSR Kadapa District and as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case mentioned above, the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 will attract even though, it is not a notified forest under the State Forest Act, evidenced by Annexure - R5. The Integrated Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Vijayawada vide letter No. IRO/VIJ/FCA/NGT/55- 03/2021/112 dated 30.12.2021 requested the State of Andhra Pradesh to submit detailed report on the following: "a. Whether or not the State Government authority issued any such order(s) to the person/ organization etc to allow them to utilize area in question (i.e. Sy. No.506 B & 507 of Nandyalampet Village of Mydukur Mandal of YSR Kadapa District) for non- forestry activities without obtaining prior approval of competent authority under FCA, 1980. If any, detailed report may please be submitted along with supporting documents; b. The comments of the State Government made under the subject court case may also be furnished", evidenced by Annexure - R5. So, they prayed for granting leave to file additional statement, if any, required later.
13. The 3rd respondent filed counter more or less reiterating the same contentions raised by them in the earlier reply submitted and as such, we are not repeating the same.
14. As directed by this Tribunal as to whether the land will fall under the definition of „Forest‟ for attracting the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 in view of the decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case, the Forest Department (Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forest Force)has filed the report dated 28.04.2022 stating that though it was recorded as „forest‟ in RSR, it was not notified as „reserved forest‟ under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Since it was shown as forest in the revenue records, without any further notification and without further qualification, it will attract the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 as per the orders of the Hon‟ble Apex Court dated 05.12.1996 in W.P. No.202 of 1995 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case.
Page 10 of 2415. As directed by this Tribunal, the State of Andhra Pradesh has filed the report through the Chief Secretary to Government dated Nil, e-filed on 30.04.2022 which reads as follows:-
"REPORT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL (SOUTH ZONE), CHENNAI, AS PER ORDERS DATED 28-10-2021 IN ORGINAL APPLICATION NO.195 OF 2020 In compliance with the Hon'ble NGT directions, a meeting was conducted with the concerned departments. The following officers were present in the VC Meeting: -
1) Sri Sanjay Gupta, IFS., Additional PCCF
2) Smt. Usha Rani, IAS, Principal Secretary, Revenue Department
3) Sri Vijay Kumar, G.SRKR, IAS, Secretary, EFS&T Department
4) Sri Vijaya Rama Raju, IAS, District Collector, Kadapa.
Averment of Principal chief Conservator of Forests and HoFF, AP The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Hyderabad in RC.No.15116/2012-J1, dated 10.05.2012 has clarified that land in question is not reserve forest land but any land notified in revenue record as forest shall not be disturbed as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court Orders in Godhavarman Case. It is also mentioned there was a survey conducted across state to identify such lands which are environmentally sensitive. However Government is yet to notify the lands.
Averments of Principal Secretary, EFS&T Department The lands in Survey No.506-B & 507 situated at Nandyalampet Village are mentioned as "Forests" as per RSR of Nandyalampet Village and as per Adangal downloaded from Meebhoomi portal, the above lands are not notified "Reserve Forest". Hence, these lands are not under the control of Forest Department for their protection and conservation.
Averment of the District Collector, YSR District The land in Survey No. 506/B with an extent of 38.94 acres and Survey No. 507 with an extent of 267.56 acres of Nandyalampet Village of Mydukur Mandal is not Reserve forest area, but recorded as "Forest", being cultivated since long time by the SC/ST/BC land less poor and displaced persons due to formation of Brahmamsagar Reservoir and, in the year 2004 temporary DKT Pattas were issued to Sivaijamadars. The Forest Officials have conducted joint inspection of the said land on 07.08.2021 along with the Revenue Officials and also accepted that the said land is not notified as Forest area. Compensatory afforestation proposals are also in progress.
Further, the subject lands are recorded as "Forest" in RSR, which is basic record to determine the classification of the land and the Petitioner's claim basing upon the wrong entry in online Revenue Record (Webland Adangal) that the subject land is Reserve Forest, which is not so under law as per revenue and forest records. The Forest Department also accepted that the subject lands are not notified as Reserve Forest. There are no violation of any environmental laws and norms as stated by the Petitioner.
Averment of Principal Secretary, Revenue Department As per the above status, there are no violations of any environmental laws and norms as stated by the Petitioner. The lands are under the control of Revenue Department. Further, the Joint Inspection report consisting of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jammalamadugu, the Divisional Forest Officer, Proddatur (WL) Division, the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Kadapa and the Tahsildar, Mydukur, dated 07.08.2021 gave finding that the subject lands are not notified as "Reserve Forest" and also not part of Lankamalla Reserve Forest or part of Tiger Corridor.
After hearing all the above views, it is determined that the lands in Survey No.506/B Extent 38.94 acres and Survey No.507 with an extent of 267.56 acres (Total Extent of 306.50 acres) of Nandyalampet Village, Mydukur Mandal is "Forest" and not Reserve Forest lands as per the RSR of the Village. The Forest Officials also agreed that the same was not notified as Reserve Forest. The Revenue Officials gave only temporary DKT pattas with an intention that the land less and poor Page 11 of 24 cultivation should not suffer as they are in possession and he land since a long time. The lands are recorded as "Forest" in RSR, which is basic record to determine the classification of the land and the Petitioner's claim basing upon the wrong entry in online Revenue Record (Webland Adangal) that the subject land is Reserve Forest, which is not so under law as per revenue and forest records. The Forest Department also accepted that the subject lands are not notified as Reserve Forest. There are no violation of any environmental laws and norms as stated by the Petitioner. This was confirmed by both the Departments.
Accordingly, it is submitted that the land is not under the control of Forest Department and it is under the control of the Revenue Department."
16. As directed by this Tribunal, the Special Chief Secretary to Government (FAC), Revenue (Lands) Department, Andhra Pradesh submitted the report dated 17.08.2022, e-filed on 20.08.2022 which reads as follows:-
"REPORT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL (SOUTH ZONE), CHENNAI, AS PER ORDERS DATED 15.07.2022 IN ORGINAL APPLICATION NO.195 OF 2O2O ... xxx ... xxx ...
I am herewith submit the following report, as per the directions of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai.
It is reported that the landless poor particularly weaker sections of Jangamrajupalli Village, B.Mattam Mandal have been entered into the subject Lands situated in Sy.No.506/B & 507 of NandyalampetaVillage, Mydukur Mandal long back and subsequently developed the lands duly making them fit for cultivation even some of them havedug bore wells and erected pipelines also for irrigation. Hence, to facilitate these landless poor with assignments. the revenue authorities have granted temporary DKT pattas over subject lands in the year 2005. At present nearly 122 landless poor persons have been cultivating the lands assigned through temporary DKT pattas in subject survey numbers and they have no other means for livelihood except lands under their possession. Moreover, these people emotionally connected with lands under their occupation as they have given blood & sweat for development of lands over the years.
Hence, instead of relocation/shifting of present cultivators from the subject lands, compensatory afforestation in non-forest area may be considered in the interest of poor cultivators.
However, the Forest Dept., has reported that non-forest land may be accepted for Compensatory Afforestation duly following extant rules and guidelines."
17. As directed by this Tribunal, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forests Force, Andhra Pradesh also filed the report dated 05.07.2022, e-filed on 21.08.2022 which reads as follows:-
"REPORT FILED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE, ANDHRA PRADESH IN O.A,No.195 OF 2020- ORDER DATED 25.O5.2022.
It is submitted that Sri Putta Sudhakar Yadav, Ex-chairman, TTD Board, Proddatur of Kadapa district filed an O.A. No.19 5/2020. dt:12.10.2020 before the Hon'ble NGT(SZ), Chennai regarding illegal encroachment of Reserve Forest area in survey nos.506-B and 507 (Reserve Forest), situated in Nandyalampet Village, S.Mydukur Mandal of YSR District.
Further, it is submitted that, the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal (SZ), Chennai in their order dated:25 .05.2022 have issued orders with Page 12 of 24 directions to the official respondents to file an independent report for consideration and posted the case for hearing on 06.07.2022. The para nos.2,3, & 6 of the order pertaining to A.P.Forest Department are reproduced below:
Para 2: When the matter came up for hearing, there is a doubt that arose as to whether the particular area in dispute is abutting the reserve forest / tiger reserve and what is the distance between the disputed land and the reserve forest / tiger reserve.
Para 3: When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for the State Department submitted that they will file a sketch of the area showing the distance between the Reserve Forest / Tiger Reserve and the land in dispute.
In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that, as per the report of the Conservator of Forests, Kurnool, the distance from Lankamalla Reserve Forest / Tiger Corridor to the disputed land is 300 mt. The Lankamalla Reserve Forest was notified u/s 16 of lvladras Forest Act 1882 vide Notification No.13 Board cf Revenue (Land Revenue) Department, Dt:14.01.1893 with an area of 97L2.7l Ha. Subsequently, this reserve forest was declared as Sri Lankamalleswara Wildlife Sanctuary under Section 18 of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 vide G.O.Ms.No.285 EFS&T for (III) Department, Dt:15,10.1988 comprising of entire Lankammalla and Lankamalla Extension Reserve Forests. Final notification was issued Under Sec 26-4 of the Wildlife (Protection) Acl, 7972 vide. G.O.Ms.No.97, Dt:17.07.1998.The Lankamalleswara Wild Life Sanctuary was included in the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR),Srisalam to Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati.
Further, it is submitted that the disputed land is abutting the Machupalli Forest Block which is notified U/s 4 of APFA,I967 vide G.O.Ms.No 410, Food and Agriculture (Forest-III),Dt. 10-03-1970.
A sketch of the area showing the distance between the Reserve Forest / Tiger Reserve and the land in dispute along with the report of the Conservator of Forests Kurnool is submitted herewith.
Para 6: The Forest Department is also directed to file an independent report as to whether any proposal has come from the State Government in this regard and if so, what is the present status, It is submitted that, no proposal has been received as on date from the Revenue Department for diversion of land which was recorded as "forest" in the said Sy.No.506-8 (38.94 acres) and Sy.No.507 (267.80 acres) of Nandyalampeta Village of Mydukur mandal for non- forestry purpose."
18. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and respondents.
19. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant argued that as per the revenue records, it is shown as reserved forest and forest and as such, no one is entitled to trespass into the area and that will amount to an offence and necessary action will have to be taken for removal of them. According to them, it is being done by the persons who are having political influence in the guise of granting pattas to the landless.
20. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State Departments viz., Revenue argued that these lands are not forest lands as notified as reserved forest and it is shown only as forest land not belong to the forest as per revenue records and the Revenue Page 13 of 24 Department is in possession of the same. So, there is no illegality on the part of the State Government in utilizing the land for their purposes.
21. The learned counsel further argued that the allegation that the persons are trespassers is not correct. They were in the possession of the land since more than 20 years and there is no political support of any ruling party as alleged by the applicant in the application, as it has been made only to tarnish the image of the present Government. In fact, certain people have been relocated when Brahmamsagaram Reservoir was constructed and they belong to ST/SC/BC community and landless people and they occupied these lands and were doing cultivation for their livelihood and considering their pitiable condition, as requested by the Revenue Divisional Officer, the then District Collector directed the Tahsildar to take steps for approaching the Forest Department to declassify the same from forest land to revenue land and directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to issue temporary DKT Patta and it is on that basis, certain persons are in possession of the same since long time. If relocation of those persons is directed, then it will adversely affect their interest. Steps are being taken for the purpose of providing alternate land for afforestation as suggested by the Forest Department and once that was identified, steps will be taken for getting permission from the concerned authorities, if any required under environmental laws.
22. The learned counsel appearing for the Forest Department argued that though it was not reserved forest or notified protected forest, since it was shown as forest in the revenue records, it will be deemed as forest for the purpose of attracting the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 as per the decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in W.P. No.202 of 1995 dated 12.12.1996 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case and without getting clearance from the concerned authority, the land should not be used for non-forest purposes.
23. The learned counsel appearing for the MoEF&CC also argued in tune with the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the Forest Department, State of Andhra Pradesh in respect of the status of the land and attraction of the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 in respect of these lands.
Page 14 of 2424. We have considered the pleadings, reports submitted and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the documents available on record.
25. The points that arose for consideration are:-
a. Whether there was any trespass into the reserved forest land as alleged by the applicant?
b. What is the nature of land that is in the occupation/possession of the alleged trespassers and whether any clearance is required from the authorities under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for converting these lands for non-forest purpose? c. What is the nature of directions (if any) to be issued considering the circumstances of the case and also applying the „Precautionary Principle‟ to protect the forest land?
d. Relief and costs.
POINTS:-
26. Grievance in this application was that large scale encroachments are being made in the reserved forest comprised in Survey Nos. 506/B and 507 in Nandyalampet Village, S. Mydukur Mandal, Y.S.R. District, State of Andhra Pradesh and according to the applicant, it is within the jurisdiction of Proddatur Division, Proddatur Range, Nagasanipalli Beat, 90-Compartment and it is also part of "Lankamalla Reserved Forest" and a "Tiger Corridor". According to the applicant, these lands are being encroached with the political support of the local political party and in spite of representations made, no action was taken.
27. But the case of the respondents including the Forest Department was that these lands are not part of any notified reserved forest or wildlife sanctuary or protected area, but as per the RSR it is shown as forest. Further, it is not in the possession of the Forest Department, but in the possession of the Revenue Department. According to the State of Andhra Pradesh and Revenue Department, since it is not a notified forest, it is not necessary to obtain any permission from the Page 15 of 24 authorities and the Revenue Department can utilize the land for their purpose.
28. Contrary to the same, Forest Department and MoEF&CC is of the view that though it is not a reserved forest or notified protected forest, since it is shown as forest in the revenue records, it will be a deemed forest for the purpose of attracting the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 as per the decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in W.P. No.202 of 1995 dated 12.12.1996 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad's Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (1997) 2 SCC267. So, without getting clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, the land should not be used for other non- forest purposes.
29. So, it is an admitted fact that it is not a notified reserve forest or protected area under the possession of the Forest Department as required under the Forest Act, as claimed by the applicant. But it is shown as forest in the revenue records and reserved forest in the Adangal download from the Meebhoomi portal.
30. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case (supra), while considering the ambit of the word „forest‟ occurring in Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 had given a wider meaning for the word „forest‟ which will have to be understood in the dictionary meaning of forest, whether it is a notified forest or notified protected forest and if it is recorded as forest in the revenue records, then this will fall under the category of deemed forest, attracting the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and no part of such land shall be converted for non-forest purpose without getting prior clearance from the authorities under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and this will be irrespective of the ownership of the land. So, it is clear from this, that if the land is recorded as forest or reserved forest in the revenue records or government records maintained by the Government, though it was not a notified forest or protected forest, then the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 will be attracted and without obtaining necessary permission/clearance from the authorities, no part of such land shall be converted for non-forest purposes.
Page 16 of 2431. This view was reiterated by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the various subsequent decisions and even in the latest decision viz., Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. Divesh Bhutani & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.10294 of 2013) and other connected cases by Judgment dated 21.07.2022, relying on the decisions of the Apex Court in M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors. 1 , M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors. [2nd M.C. Mehta case]2, M.C. Mehta(Kant Enclave Matters, In Re.) Vs. Union of India & Ors. [3rd M.C. Mehta case]3, wherein the Hon‟ble Apex Court has held that if it is recorded as forest in the revenue records or deemed to be forest under any of the provisions of the State laws irrespective of the character of the land, on land, the provision of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 will be attracted and this was reiterated by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the various recent decisions as well.
32. So, the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Revenue Department that since it is not notified reserved forest and it is in the possession of the Revenue Department, though it was shown as forest in the Revenue Settlement Records, it is not necessary to obtain necessary permission/clearance is not sustainable and the same is rejected. However, certain persons are now in possession of the property on the basis of the temporary patta granted by the Government and according to the various reports, that they are displaced persons who lost their land when Brahmamsagar Reservoir was constructed and they are in possession of the land for more than 20 years and doing cultivation since long time.
33. It is also seen from the various counter statements and reports filed by the respective departments that even the then District Collector who instructed the Revenue Divisional Officer to issue temporary patta (DKT Patta) has addressed the Forest Department for declassifying the lands from forest to revenue land even during 2011 and the Forest Department had rejected the prayer on the ground that the same cannot be done in view of the dictum laid down by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case. But the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is not a total prohibition of 1 (2004) 12 SCC 118 2 (2008) 17 SCC 294 3 (2018) 18 SCC 397 Page 17 of 24 conversion of forest land for non-forest purpose, it is a permissive legislation to promote sustainable development and for certain purposes, permission can be granted. It only mandates for prior clearance from the authorities mentioned therein and there is no total prohibition of conversion of land for non-forest purposes. There are certain procedures provided for making the application and under what circumstances, permissions will have to be granted and with what conditions etc. There was a provision for afforestation of certain extent of land to be identified for the purpose of afforestation with liability to maintain the land and certain amount will have to be fixed to be payable being the value of the forest land which is being allocated for non-forest purpose and that amount will have to be utilized for conservation and preservation of the forest.
34. It is also seen from the report submitted by the Forest Department that it is adjacent to the "Sri Lankamalleswara Wildlife Sanctuary"
(comprising of entire Lankammalla and Lankamalla Extension Reserve Forests) and also the "Tiger Corridor" and it is in the nature of ecologically sensitive area, but the eco-sensitive area has not been notified. However, in view of the discussions made above, without getting clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, no forest land can be utilized for non-forest purposes even though it is not a reserved forest or a notified protected forest as required under the Wildlife (Protection) Act or under the Forest Act. But, if it is shown as forest in the revenue records, it must be understood in the dictionary meaning of forest and in such cases, this will fall under the definition of deemed forest and the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 will be attracted as per the dictum laid down by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad‟s case, which was followed in the later cases as well.
35. So, without getting necessary clearance, no activity shall be carried out in these lands and the State Government should take necessary steps to get proper clearance from the concerned authorities under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, if they want to utilize these areas. If such application is made, then the concerned authority is required to consider the following aspects and only thereafter, they can consider the question as to whether the clearance can be granted or not for this purpose.
Page 18 of 24 Consider the question as to whether conversion of Forest land for non-forest purpose such as agricultural operations is permitted under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980;
Consider the proximity of the impugned lands to "Sri Lankamalleswara Wildlife Sanctuary" (comprising of entire Lankammalla and Lankamalla Extension Reserve Forests)"
and also the "Tiger Corridor" which facilitates movement of Tigers from the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR), Srisailam to Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati (It is reported by the PCCF that the Lankamalleswara Wild Life Sanctuary was included in the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR), Srisailam to Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati). So, conversion of this area for agricultural purposes is likely to enhance the possibility of man-animal conflicts and this aspect must be considered;
Take into account the current tiger population and trends of tiger population growth and assess whether there is any need for expanding the Sanctuary area and widening of the corridor in the near future to meet growing needs of tiger population and facilitate the unhindered movement of the Tigers and prevent any possible exposure of the dharkhast pattadars and the animals, likely to be engaged during agricultural operations, to the Tigers during their movement in the area;
Take into account the recent orders of Hon‟ble Supreme Court that every National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary in the country shall have a mandatory eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) of at least one kilometre starting from its demarcated boundaries.
36. In case, the State Government is not interested in applying for clearance, then they must take steps to reallocate the persons to whom the temporary pattas have been granted to some other area/land to which the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 will not be extended.
Page 19 of 2437. So under such circumstances, we feel that the application can be disposed of by giving following directions:-
a. We hold that the allotment of land or grant of temporary patta by the District Administration to the persons in Survey Nos. 506/B and 507 of Nandyalampet Village, S. Mydukur Mandal, Y.S.R. District, State of Andhra Pradesh which is shown as „Forest‟ in the revenue records without getting clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is not legal.
b. The State of Andhra Pradesh is directed to take appropriate steps to get clearance from the concerned authorities under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, if permissible under law for this purpose and if such application is made, then the concerned authority is directed to consider the following aspects and only thereafter, they can consider the question as to whether the clearance can be granted or not for this purpose.
Consider the question as to whether conversion of Forest land for non-forest purpose such as agricultural operations is permitted under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980;
Consider the proximity of the impugned lands to "Sri Lankamalleswara Wildlife Sanctuary" (comprising of entire Lankammalla and Lankamalla Extension Reserve Forests)" and also the "Tiger Corridor" which facilitates movement of Tigers from the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR), Srisailam to Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati (It is reported by the PCCF that the Lankamalleswara Wild Life Sanctuary was included in the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR), Srisailam to Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati). So, conversion of this area for agricultural purposes is likely to enhance the possibility of man-animal conflicts and this aspect must be considered;Page 20 of 24
Take into account the current tiger population and trends of tiger population growth and assess whether there is any need for expanding the Sanctuary area and widening of the corridor in the near future to meet growing needs of tiger population and facilitate the unhindered movement of the Tigers and prevent any possible exposure of the dharkhast pattadars and the animals, likely to be engaged during agricultural operations, to the Tigers during their movement in the area;
Take into account the recent orders of Hon‟ble Supreme Court that every National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary in the country shall have a mandatory eco- sensitive zone (ESZ) of at least one kilometre starting from its demarcated boundaries.
c. The Forest Department is directed to conduct a detailed study, including wildlife experts in the team, on the need for expanding the area of the Sanctuary and the Tiger Corridor before making a recommendation either to reject or accept the proposal for conversion, if the matter is referred to them by the Revenue Department. Pending decision on the issue of conversion of the land, the occupation of the forest land is to be treated as persons in possession of the land against law.
d. The Revenue authorities should also verify whether the lands are in the possession of the original allottees, who were displaced due to the said reservoir project. In case the allottees have sold the said lands or not in possession, which were only allotted temporarily, then take immediate action for restoring the lands to the Government.
e. If the State of Andhra Pradesh did not want to apply for any clearance as mentioned above, then they are directed to relocate the persons to whom temporary pattas have been granted to another area/land to which the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is not extended and till then, no permanent activity of disturbing the nature of the land in dispute should be carried out by the persons in possession Page 21 of 24 of the same. This must be done at the earliest at any rate within a period of 6 (Six) months from today.
38. The points are answered accordingly.
39. In the result, this Original Application is allowed in part and disposed with the following directions:-
i. We hold that the allotment of land or grant of temporary patta by the District Administration to the persons in Survey Nos. 506/B and 507 of Nandyalampet Village, S. Mydukur Mandal, Y.S.R. District, State of Andhra Pradesh which is shown as „Forest‟ in the revenue records without getting clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is not legal.
ii. The State of Andhra Pradesh is directed to take appropriate steps to get clearance from the concerned authorities under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, if permissible under law for this purpose and if such application is made, then the concerned authority is directed to consider the following aspects and only thereafter, they can consider the question as to whether the clearance can be granted or not for this purpose.
Consider the question as to whether conversion of Forest land for non-forest purpose such as agricultural operations is permitted under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980;
Consider the proximity of the impugned lands to "Sri Lankamalleswara Wildlife Sanctuary"
(comprising of entire Lankammalla and Lankamalla Extension Reserve Forests)" and also the "Tiger Corridor" which facilitates movement of Tigers from the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR), Srisailam to Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati (It is reported by the PCCF that the Lankamalleswara Wild Life Sanctuary was included in the tiger corridor connected from Nagarjunasagar Tiger Reserve (NSTR), Srisailam to Page 22 of 24 Sri Venkateswara National Park (SVNP), Tirupati).
So, conversion of this area for agricultural purposes is likely to enhance the possibility of man-animal conflicts and this aspect must be considered;
Take into account the current tiger population and trends of tiger population growth and assess whether there is any need for expanding the Sanctuary area and widening of the corridor in the near future to meet growing needs of tiger population and facilitate the unhindered movement of the Tigers and prevent any possible exposure of the dharkhast pattadars and the animals, likely to be engaged during agricultural operations, to the Tigers during their movement in the area;
Take into account the recent orders of Hon‟ble Supreme Court that every National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary in the country shall have a mandatory eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) of at least one kilometre starting from its demarcated boundaries.
iii. The Forest Department is directed to conduct a detailed study, including wildlife experts in the team, on the need for expanding the area of the Sanctuary and the Tiger Corridor before making a recommendation either to reject or accept the proposal for conversion, if the matter is referred to them by the Revenue Department. Pending decision on the issue of conversion of the land, the occupation of the forest land is to be treated as persons in possession of the land against law.
iv. The Revenue authorities should also verify whether the lands are in the possession of the original allottees, who were displaced due to the said reservoir project. In case the allottees have sold the said lands or not in possession, which were only allotted temporarily, then take immediate action for restoring the lands to the Government.
v. If the State of Andhra Pradesh did not want to apply for any clearance as mentioned above, then they are directed to Page 23 of 24 relocate the persons to whom temporary pattas have been granted to another area/land to which the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is not extended and till then, no permanent activity of disturbing the nature of the land in dispute should be carried out by the persons in possession of the same. This must be done at the earliest at any rate within a period of 6 (Six) months from today.
vi. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Head of Forest Force and Chief Wildlife Warden, State of Andhra Pradesh and the District Collector - Y.S.R. Kadapa District are directed to file their compliance report before this Tribunal within a period of 6 (Six) months.
vii. Considering the circumstances, parties are directed to bear their respective costs in the original application.
viii. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the District Collector - Y.S.R. Kadapa District, Divisional Forest Officer - Proddatur (WL) Divison, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forest Force, the Special Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Environment, Forests, Science and Technology and the Chief Secretary to Government, State of Andhra Pradesh for their information and compliance of directions.
ix. As and when the report is filed, the Registry is directed to place the same before the Bench for consideration and also for issuing further directions (if any) required in this regard.
40. With the above observations and directions, this Original Application is disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, E.M. O.A. No.195/2020 (SZ), 02nd September 2022. Mn.
Page 24 of 24