Karnataka High Court
The Cochin Malabar Estate And ... vs State Of Karnataka Rep By Its Secy on 16 April, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH coum op KARNATA.KA4AT_--3AN'é$LC¥R4EAV
DATED THIS THE 166: 1)AYeoF:'A?R1i;»::0o§§
BE"""3 'R3 %
THE HON'BLE MR. .5 s 3oPA:§N55
wnrr Psrrrxcayfijwo.
W.P.Nos 3oo2o;2oo0,_fz9739/ '$943; 2001,
355091 AND',.31-87~!'2Q05*'
"1
BETWEEN "" -
1
THE COCH}N'MALABAR.ESTA?3E 85 INDUSTRIES LTD
HAVING yrs REGSTf3 O_ 1~*1c1::, MALABAR
HOUSE, ma1s'row.RoAD,
wE1,.r.1N<m'z»z.;s:..e.1~:13,'c:oc1-I11~z~ 682 003
KEEPALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF
V' _ E'CU_T¥V"'é,'zOFFICER; S B BHA'§"I'ER
A .THOMSO N:,FL;AhTATIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
SAPJPE-.¥E" KCINADU PGST
'MAEIKERI--'i'ALUK.
KOI)AG_UDI5ZsTRIC'F--574 234
REP. E3Y.ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
_L ' M31'. THCHHAS Jr.
= " 5,59 moms, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
PETYTIONERS
' " (}3sy"sri;s.v;.;AYA SHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL AND
A * " s.s. SRIPATHY: Sn'. mum KUNIAR K,
. " Sm nmm cnmnappa M. FOR
.. 'M/s CREST LAW PARTNERS, AI)Vs.]
h
4-
an
AND :
1 STATE 0? KARNATAKA V _ A
REP BYITS SECRETARY
FOREST DEPARTMEN'1'. vxmiawa saunas
BANGALORE J % Q_ '
2 av CONSERVATOR §r3RFor§~fi$'iV*1
MADIKERI DIVISIONV ~ .. ;
MADIKERHKODAGU DIST.) : " 'A
3 RANGE FoRE:::-if' OFF§€:';Ei?»'_:'V.«i 5
SAMPAJE R.4aNq?ar,,a1»:pA;E _ %
' Rgsponmms
(By Sri : B,v...a.caA'Rm,_ ¢DVO{§ATE---GENERAL FOR
Sri : 15*; M MA9IJ;:NA*;rH, 'ficqa FOR RI-R3)
THIS wmpmm :r4S'-.-*%:'1.'".r.«.:D UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE (,':x'--_3_1'~l37{'I'I'{;¥'l'ItI}I~I'«£3*F mum, WITH A PRAYER TO:
QUASH THE ORDERS/°N'0'I'ICES DT. 'L'7.3.Qfl VIBE ANNEXJ.
_A'NI:> Ncrajxcms DT. 4';:5.29ppwDE AN!'-IEX.M. Arm THE ENTIRE
PR«C}CE'§3DIN,GS PENDING BEFORE THE 2-» RESPONDENT
'R_E£.A'l7I_1SJG TO SKZHEDULE PROPERTY.
BETWEEN
' mmmuo RUBBER ESTATE LIMITED
REG_S'1'_D QFFICE AT No.17, GGLDEN
C}F?C'i-.IiD,'AKAS"'I'URBA ROAD, BLORE-I
.3? ms. DIRECTOR {ALA KURIAN UTHUP
,!§I!AJ--0R PETFFIONER
(By SR1 S. VIJAYA SHANKAR. SR. COUNSEL FOR
" SR! 'I'.I. ABDULLAH, M/S HEGDE ASSOCLATES, A0133)
E
AND :
1 STATE OF KARNATAKA "
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY FQR' .
ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENT EEEOEEST -
M.S.BUILDINGS, _
DRAMBEDKAR VEEDH
BANGALORE-1 "
2 DY OONSERVATOR OE[EORES1$, 2
VIRAJPET DMSIOE,v1RA.JPE'r.¢_-.._ A
KODAGU;_DIST,,A-' =
3 DY C0iHM§.SSI6fiER
VAEODAOIA DIST
4 E
MAKIITA NRAEOES, s.!AEDf1'A
(By Sri .:_B.V. AO1jAEYA,ADViOcATE GENERAL FOR
: H. M MAm.uNA'm, HCGA FOR R1-R4)
RESPONDENTS
' PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
°227.OE"r.HE 'OONSITHIHON OF' INDIA, wm: A PRAYER T0:
DIRECT THE RESPONDENPS PERTAINING TO THE
PE'mr:ONER.*S CASE; QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY
_Tl-IE RS2 &ND"'3 VIDE ANNE, E AND G DATED 2.5.98 VIDE
'A_NN.B, BATED 24.9.98 VIDE ANNE AND DATED CZOTH APRIL,
ANN.G AND ALSO VIDE ANNJ DATED 21.7.2000;
4 DIRECT. THE RESPONDENTS Norr T0 INTERFERE WITH THE
" _PEACE-.P'UL POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE LANDS
REMOVAL OF THE RUBBER TREES CUT FROM THE ESTATE.
)
BALEHONNUR HOBLI J
BALEHONNUR T '
CHIKKAMAGALUR DIST.
(By Sré : av. ACHARYA, ADVOCATE, GENERAL FO:*€
Sri ; H M MANJUNATH, HcGAV__§@_R R1-R3) ' '
THIS wan' PE'l'i'I'ION~..IS man U.NDE~R AImc{.Es 226 35
227 OF THE c<:;Ns':'I'I'I_;*mr.~:' or? II*!1)IA";--§i.'IT¥i A PRAYER T0:
QUASH ms: oamzns ma 24.3.2009' JAN!) 'my: gzomezenaoum
DT. 25.3.2000 av :33 AS Ar»?-.123 A.NPI--T,AND 'I'L."RESPECTWELY,
THE ORDER DT. 24.6.3000 'gar "z:2;2., VIBE; ANN---W2, THE
RECOVERY Normcggar. 28":8.'}:Oi)0 13ar_R5'v:--m; ANN-Y AND THE
ENTRIES PROCEEDm{GS B.§:Eo:a_E »rTa3 Mzzm, 4TH AND 5TH
RESPONDENTS R_i§L_AT!§EG TO.'THE VSCBEDULE PROPERWES.
BETWEEN :* " A' %'
M/S N1;raMBu'1éR tIBBi:R C0159
BAVII§I.G rrs. REG. omen
" "!s.'_I' BE£Ei3}~;_---ROAD, cA1.:t::U*r
KERAHLR S'1"A;'I'E,'i'~EEP. BY-ITS
'DIRE(jiTQR..M;3?;'CBER§AN
PETFITONER
(By S;:~i:%s V£1'2§j'AV.'SVHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR
331 o v_SH{W'4RAMA BHA1')
.. _. fr 4
*s*i'ATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED
BY ITS SECRETARY
FOREST DEPARTMENT
VIi)HANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE
I
u
~
2 CONSERVATOR OF F'0RES'I'S
KODAGU CIRCLE
MADIKERI
COORG
3 DY CONSERVATOR 0? FOi2E ST_ % V
MADIKERIDIVISION *
MADIKERI (KODAGU) RESPQPEDENTS
(By Sri : av. ACHARYA, FOR
Sri : H M MANJUNATH, HCGA' f'0§?
THIS WRIT PEITFEON IS FILED._U'Ni"}ER ARTICLES 225 85
227 OF' *rHE,<:r.>.!sIs*rm:1*:s:;:s; 132.? mmA.Mw1'm A PRAYER TO:
QUASH THE1 oemtus PASSED BY :23 vma
AnNEx.:,. «:;=;_m;.=22~: Vmzocganguas PENDING 2390123
R2 RELATING '"FQTTHEi'€$CH_EQ ULE PROPERTIES.
BETWEEN X:
s V' Mrs ~§{t§:RcARA..RuBéE'Rs' LTD
amen 0991335-rnnvaoaamam BANGALOW
'--:3ALEHoN:~1u$:,'~H;.esAN DIST, KARNATAKA smrn
PIN '-577 1'12;..,,RE1=f{B'Y ITS GENERAL
MANAGER cammn PHELIP s/0. mra
M.C. ffi-IILVIP,' 42--'Y12:Aas, R/AT No.33,
' ST.MAI€KS' ROAD. BANGALORE -01 PETITIONER
ff " (38y :s5é1s ir'1JAYA SHANKAR, SR. counsm. FOR
= _ . SR1' o SHIVARAMA BEAT)
" W1' STATE 09' KARNATAKA REP BY ITS sac?
FOREST DEPT
M.S. BUELDING
E3ANGALORE~01
3' 'H29---
2 CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
KODAGU CIRCLE
MADIKERI
P£N- 527120: V _
3 DEPUTY CONSSERVATOR OFEQRESTS
MADIKERIDIVISION
MSIKERI 1'
PIN-321201 _ "V-.}jV'v%.g.nE'sPoNnENTs
(By Sri : av. ACHARYA, ADY0:Cz1.TEV-.G§3NERAL
S:-i : H 9.4 Mm1juNATHj, HCQA s§0p¢:2:gR3)»
THIS W3RIT.;PET£TI€.'}N4 ISSFIL-ED GENDER ARTICLES 226 as
227 0? mg c:QN.<.m1ju1~1Qu,_ GE' .;.1~;_m;, WITH A PRAYER T0
QUASH 'rHEJ'oR;::1:i2s':vA;DT. 1'277»2{)94 AND D'I'.5-8-2004 OF' R'-3
VIBE ANIM .3; B RE$P.ECTwEI':z,_ «
3.». fig m%,%;m
p;{)3.&imr&é10Q'R--..RuBBER co LTD
0mcEvA"*..;:L§.'1u.,§:QoRG ESTATE
l{i:'}YfiNA'£);-vMAI)iKER'I TALUK
KODAGU D191'; PPETETIONER
- (By siéi 3 WJAYA SIr{AT-IKAR. SR. COUNSEL FOR
SR! 0 VSHIVARAMA BHAT)
STATE OF' KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
FOREST DEPARTMENT
M S 1-3UlLD§NG
DRAMBEDKAR RGAD
BANGALORISLI
.
(4
2 DEPUTY C-ONSERVATOR OF' FORESTS
MADIKERI DIVISION
MADEKERI
KODAGU DIST A
(By Sri : av. ACHARYA, ADvocATE_'€;E_N'E_;2AL .FOR__
Sfi : H M MANJuNA'r%L..}1cGA FOR 5213,33 " "
THIS Wm' PETI'I'ION..iS_ FILE:D..bUN£>ERV--:a:(r1cLEs 226 85
227 OF THE cowsfnufion <39 INDIA, WITH A PRAYER TO:
QSASH *1':-us: DEMAMJ' Nc:rr~n:i:E"n'r; .3o»'w,t.:1-o4 OF R2 VIBE
ANm:x.A; Q_l§AS!:i cow. ~..Oz*-EDER. UI'. 29.5.97 vzm:
ANNEXBI; QUASH'. THE GfQVY'.---...OR'{)E'R DT. 26.6.03 was
ANNEx.B2.%__V ,
TIicese__ having been reserved for
0fd€'.I'S, coming' on 'farvpmfiauncement this day, the Court
pmnou1:xccad..thc foiinwigig: '*- '
".NaRpmR _____
are minor variations with regard to the
natiuvg during which each of the wtitioners have
z vvfizterest in the properties involved, the ult1ma' tn
ji<f1_1esޤns in all these petitions are with regard to the legal
of the lands, the outstanding lease rents if any,
value payable ifany and the period of lease to which
the petitioners am entitled. Hence all these petitions am
X
14
consideied together since the common qucsfihfifis V "
would decide the facts involveei
would also take care of the pcxiphgral isafies 1
2. The petitioners in w.p;rs;ci24363;2co¢)V%% that
M/s. Sampaje Rubbers Ease of
268.62 acres of land 53/7, 68/11,
68/12, 58/13, Je.g;,19, 'Sampajc and
Uzubyluchcltgbfif of lease dated
27.10.1913", to have been sold by
Mia Saiapaje in favour of M/s.Sampajc
Rubber dated 3.8.1928. Another
exaeutggr "$.16 A :sy.No.53/15, 68/ 16 and 68/17 of
V. granted under indcntuze of lease dated
of 31.05 acres out of 48 acrcs in
_Sy.Né;68,{ l'5v surrendered to Government through
oompfismg 30.60 acres and Sy.No.68]23
of 0.45 aacms and an area of 16.95 acres in
15 were retainxfi. The said transaction was by
«k ccrrf"'r£J
Vida or H
36 ,7- O8
953 I
I3
gantcd lease of 473.36 aorta in Sy.No.l/1, 1/2, _
4/2 and 4/3 situate at far-%'n:;:pe;gf
cultivation vidc 'mdcz1turc of >
cxtnnt of 237 acres in Sy.no.1/35:5, 2/122 ] ;f21A of
Kalur villw was dated
24.2.1915. Anomgr :s:y.No.;/4 and
1/7 of 1/12 of Kalur
village 1.131212.-i.' 'the said mzds were
ganted according to the
petitionfi, "t!'1cV.fi2y. the Sccxetary of Static ibr
India i;1_(3ou1ii;i1Vis.f9%; of999 yeam. The said M/:5
' S}?-xiicain is sand' to have paid' the timber
standinlg on the lands bcfbn: cleanh g the
sa.inc;}br miiisfiéuiavanion vidc onicr No.14 dated 1.2.1909
'gxzd G01iVC112I5d the lands into rubber estate. The
Ltzamfinany is said to have sold the entire rights in the
"mentioned above, 'n1 favour of the petitioner under a
" of assignncnt dated 31.7.1944 and the peiitIonc' r is
H thcmaftcr in oontinuoujgposaession and enjoyment of the
p
u
same. The petitioner is said to have filed "
bcfom the Rubber Boaxd on
declarillg the extent of area
contended that the life span of
and would have to be swt
view-ea only am"? an the manner is
said to have a 1999 n';ga1d1n' g
the payment" 'fins led to the order
a':§ é'i1t;h the legal contentions
urged in E£'hi$i ° to the emiicr ones.
W.P.§i5.79*%3[O1, the petitioner clams that by
plated 30.5.1910, the Secremry of State for
In&:i..vL1 itA1 sand' to have cxucutcd the same in favour
Cpf Chill , flu; Murray Aynsley anti Chaflcs Gaxdm
the said hand forms part of Devamkolli estate
abandoned coffee 1% measuring 208 acres situate T
" Monnangeri and Bcttattur v1llagc' in Memara --
Kafilunad, Bengunad L:-KuiongI:1'h1ad of Mcmara and
rcg'stration declaring the extent of rubber piantntion. Ixithe
instant case, the petitioner is said to have V 2
dated 10.9.1999 fivom the Deputy Consclvafioriéif H
with mgani to lease rents etc which fixdér
ixnpuped. The icgal oontcntitms 8"
same are similar no the other
6. In that an
area of 1074 ' Taluk was
granted 1911 and 1915
in fiavouljnf Epetitioners for rubber
czfltivatifiizj anti claimed is for 999 years.
The pcfit1on' ':.?.1's' - an be in ' and
enjoy;::f.§1f:tLAof sa1d- V' lfiildi-3 by cultivating and mam' tannin' ' g
In the present mm also, the
issued with the natice relating an the
timber value which has cumma' tcd in the
H 'A 'T dated l4.3.300{) whezeunder the lease rent
T§£..Rs.7#'i,7o,2o5/- and the value of Rs.3,,82,16,991/-
A
-r
is onrlerfi to be pad. The legal "
assailing the order impugned .4/atlgiézi
petitions.
7. In w.p.No.s1s7;%2oo5A,%%%1§i;¢.pe::a§n¢r%e1a:;$as the
similar fight under 30.5.1910 and
1.2.1911 for a of éemmxd made
towanis fiiiiéxequent period is
que:st:io:1;a;d__.¢)_1A:£" that have ban
urged bgfthem ggetition.
§:'.--vAtt}1§é;s$1;ag¢§'its £.slf}i;t;is made clear that, though this
zntiizcred' ' of the petitioners with regard to _
"fink; by which they have acquired interest
lessees and though they am pzescntly in
of the lands and though the petitioners claim' in" g
$§1_;bs@ucnt interest mire been allowed to come on mcard in
V. pet1tw' ' as, the quesfion as in whether such succession or
faoqu.isit:ion is in aoooznzianée with the imms of lease or not is
not considered in thegcpefifiong since the samed.-2e;sf:' "
a part of the impugned older even tligughifia iv e
the violation of the terms was .
9. However, in geese for
consideration, the on behalf
of the that the lease
granted in predecessors is
by the Cotmcil, through the
Chief ..wle:ich is for a period of 999
years and jar the lands involved am also
" V' lands and as such the lessor
't1§e.VGe-vemment and thereafter in the present
'iflgie lessor be1n' g the State Government, the
..(5<'2neeIvafor of Forests does not have the jurisdiction
A X i;¢» xe€i--u1ce the term of lease or exemise any manner of right in
of the property which has been leased to the
" eetitionexs by the Government. Even othenwise, the
properties have been assessed to land revenue and the land
12
19
revenue has been paid by the petitioners which ~
the rent which has been stated iuc:,e%:itu§;ii¢;V " " 2
mid since' what is Iequired to be ' ;"'§s:' 't%i:'f11€:i1.e_:A
Govetmment, it could be __in we Vf'o3:'¥1 l".!'.9l1eA
respondents cannot clzfim' that to
pay both the asses3ment;*--s;f"lanel ea well esuthe rent
smted under the videetiia. sincx: the
payment 'm heel? 'eyfthe Geveuament,
no further as demanded by
the the enhanced lease
rentals iespondents relying on the
Government is.Tno't- siietainable for the maaen that the
V' pf said Gowzmment order relates to
2 is annual lease and net R31" the least:
$811' ' as in the present case. Evm otherwise' .
mntwfiras not revised on that basis. In so fixras the timber
&, the basic contenficn is that the buds 'm
are all rubber planisafion at present afier clem'm' g
.=the natumily gmvwn trees b paying timber vaiue. As such
an
an
once having pa1d' the timber value at the time of .
forest growth, the question of paymentqf .4 " =
on subsequent felling of trees does net A'
that since the pefitionem had the
the entries have been indicated such
may being made, the value
subsequently ldoee not it is also
contended tree has been
cut, the not belong to the
T' * is also that the
'»'I%1:a'ees Act has exempted mbber
trees and as th'¢:1*e"isV'fie restriction on the falling of the
it 'E context the petitioners mi from
of the authority, have also
Fcxxtier passed demanding the sad amount
the period of lease. The apecific references
hutxess the said contentions wouki be referred to
analyslh g the contentions.
is
42
10. The respondents 'm jusfijipgzfion '4 '*1
contended that the Chief 155 i
notification No.11 dated 15.31;1_z_;_s7
Forest Act, 1878 (hcminafwr 19 as A12: 1878')
to the pmvinoc of Coorg; sinner
of Ca-org vitie nofifigafion has declared
the c:onsfit11tion{" with effect from
30.5.1904 Act. The Chief
i Q; ~ » é No.14 dated
1.2. under which the msexve
and fon1 es.t. "1nay be dcmiscd for rubber
* c;uu=a;;i1o;;ua¢er tiie"'pIdviaions of Regulation 42 and 143(1)
"Land and Rzwenuc Regulations, 1899
(héieiiihficf. to as 'the regulation of 1899' for short).
_ 1 rules were notified vidc notification No.98
:d_ai¢d"'-31.12.1912. The extent of land as clailned to have
in favour of the pchhoners is basically not
'4"v.vV£i'i$1pumd but what is oantzndcd is that the said lands seamed
in favour of the pefitioncrs are situate in the reserve forest
L
'FR
22
and as such the nature of iand to 9
forest. The said lands wen: to be hcifi sz¥1'l4J'}'f:f*;c"t4'
and ether stipulations. 011: cu? fix: L,
Government rescxvcs to itself to
the rules Eran: time to Sine; a}l {_ an
"gr Adda ' kg, :Tgo,w;;w,fiud:h,,ma!e, MaPPITOma1e flares
W W. mg mm m mm or/Paw em
5", 1g. 7»'LD°£ Reserve Forest; to grant the
bx same for said lands have
V . . ' . _
been 1 _ 179: the saici purpose. The
pmvisionis, 1873 Act, Section 2:» of the
Indian' Fo11=,;.f"A¢t, mfermd to as the 1927
'~ Apt) the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963
to as the 1963 Act) also contained the
§3.§iL%aewafion of reserve threats. Then: is no
.¥1¥ld€r the pmvisions of the respective Acts
'A the schedule land shall cease to bc a reserve
Sincc the said land was notified as reserve f()Iest in
T year 1904 much prior to the lease ganted in favour of
Athc petitioners, since lfise is permitted for rubber
ouitivation, the enjoyment of the said land by the ~ 3
would be in the nature of the
forest and the petitioners otlzef
by basing on certain stray the
it is contended that be
sold. The xespondents provisions in
the Act of 2: Consclvator of
Fozest ('DCF5 Forest Officer have
eineétton since the some are
forest .'_'i'I'1e the DCF was only required
to finmfsh the Accountant General is also
it is that on the dues being pointed
have to pmnd further to recover the
Sam.' télegeiindents contend that the pct:it1oncr' bcmg' the
' '.1esseeo.f Jfltagehiends in question has to pay to the Government
price, the annual lease rent, local rates B:-Ma" hie
timber value in respect of the lands leased to them.
" per one of the terms, the land was free of rent for eight
H years and thereafter the ref payable was Rs.2/- per ecu:
23
Survey Mmual, the saga lands an: '4 " =
and unredeemed which reiier onlgrfln
depending on the payment of'
would not be applicable for de::ea11d
made for the timber vali;e"':and'_: ig Htvvherefozre
attempted to be Ajusfifigg respondents
contending thaég' enjoyed the
largesse of mm amund to
quesr;o1;'"'£i§£ :§f.e§_11s when it is pointed
cut that without paying rents. The
forest under the Government is
in amounts due under the terms of
to the period of lease, it is mntendeé
theft {fijvmmissioner of Coorg vide notifimtion dated
1;5.5.1'94{3e«:haa isaued revised mics under which the lam
'V.g1-gyeh; demised for rubber cultivation under Iegulatzion of
the period provided fin' is 99 years. Since the
.4 has reserved to itseif the right to alter the rules
from time to time, the C0$tt'.'I1fB of the subsequent rules of
Commissiencr of Georg who was ti}: thfill." the "
Government in Ooorg province and .'
in the present petitions relate ti: .guc1:L "a*_ it' is;g
State Government which had the
issues involved. In 'm an
appropriate situatfigzn, it jigifopcr hr this
Caurt to c:onsid_é:i" of' at the outset,
be-fon: However, in the
present has been dealt with, by
"QICV into four facets. The
argumgnts fiiD3i:*"'LVeither side woum prime facic
* sndicégie mm; said that in respect am}; the facets
the jurisdiction and as such a separate
this aspect and thereafter oonsidcxing the
'Vfgour f.%mc1?s;_w§:uLcI amount to overlapping and repetition and
éiich it would be apprcopriatae to advert to each of the
while considering the same, the issue relating to
'fliie jurisdiction of nap in take any decision on that me: of
the mattcr would also be advcrtcd to.
L
,1
'1'?
memnme um LEGAL smws 9} j A Q " 'V:
13. The fiat facet of the be is V
relating to the Legal seams of m§t"ia§ds in this
aspect, the DCF has to iéhe 'time legal
status of the lands, forest and
in one of the Conservator of
Forests. of the DCF, the
learned learned counsel for
the V.t11:hat the lands in question are
no more reserve the said area has been brought
'~ and the character of the }and has
Apart fium referring to the applicatiozus
mad" etc Board to indicate that the emtza has been
H rubber cultivation, it is further contended by
'A t in Annexuze-V series produced in we: Petitioru
V _ e..'.eNeg.é§%39/2000 to contend that the said lands are redeemed
T Ihfids. The said docuzaczlt is also relied on While contending
V with regard to the value and as. such necessary
disputed that it is reserve forest since the u
fall under the ma which has been %Tas%T{;.gm¢;a;g3:[ T
vfit: notificatien dated 3.s.19eet;. fig
notification datnd 1.2.1909,
of reserve and Paisari file lease
of zreserve forest fa; the It is in
that contxzxt, . threat were
leased to ޤ-titionem to which the
"m question has been
notified provisions under the Act
of 1878, the Lfieame .c;c:I:ti'nue' rcmzfiam as such since then: is
V' ",0 an' 4.-a "either under the sand' Act or under
V 'Act of 1963 though smnlaa" ' pmvxsxfi ' as are
avaaigbie sax!" Acts. While on this aspect, 1 deem it
into thc tenure cf the land anti titnber rights
it wuuki have IEICVBBCYO in deciding the status of
the analysis wouki be useful for dcacidi:-ng the claim
'4 rent and timber value as WEB when the said' issues an:
adVCI't{§d £0. L
'4' C
an absoiute gant made in favour of the .
pefitioners like any other Govcxnmcxatlangi, K x
the same becoming a sagu land
to ryotwari tclmre cannot be (fir
apart, when the lease fgfidicams
in the indcnturc that W}VIléi'!.::i$ géafiwe forest land
and without: kid' indicate that
the tram': ef timber
value under cultivation.
it is dmzuag it was shown as Paisari on
24.11.19l 3.V_a 11d as redeemed saga.
Even goflzglwigécg. _ is indicated as 'Paisari', the
hvidé:5s Gave" %%%%% Wm' mcnt. Therefore, that could be
Paisari' which is distinct from
Iands grantod as wast: lands under the
irzicvmi {files which is not the situation in the case on hand
is least: pursuant to the Rules framed under
;g¢-guzation 1399. The c1ass;1ica' fion cf and
' ."'G0vcrnme:nt Paisari' mevgindicatecl in Appendix ---B to
38
settlement of 1910. The said term 'Paisari' is changed"
used as 'sagu land' either redeemed er ,/
depending on whether timber has been paid for.x3'-iif '
is also indicated in Rule 112 of settamgt ;o£«__19m..f:
prior to this, Rule 101 states: that ''
temm: of land held on full iifi,-E 'éeigu',
which obviously is not in the-,.,
instant cases is lease under the
specific rules to; the decision
of the Honfiiié case of STATE OF
KARNATAKE ar{; V;i€f§iADER (Am 1990 so
1225) on is to be news. The
pefifioncxs smnc to oontemi rcgmding
to moortl of right and its
mspondents have relied on the same to
arise only if it is dam: as oontamplated.
fin thé 3316.. ck 4' the Hoxfblc Supreme Court was considering
x V' fa Qimation as agmst the one on hand and validity of
from redeemed tofllnxwcexncd was mnsfimw and
7,
stated that it could be made only ag '4 "=
Rcglflation 29 by direction or
Commissioner and the presumptign
In the instant cases, is
made as per onier of £163; an éirection
or notification or_c:hief paltictflazrly,
when the lease and as
such even 0f the entries
made * the same mason the
decision ,0? MYSORE vs. KANTHAJE
THIMMANNA4"'BHAT .AND més {1968(2) Mys.L.J. 227} also
V' would :19 to the petitioners. Even othczwisc
'ajvmcrship of the plaintiffs themin was. not
dispgted fig Government The decision in the case of
T1g§AHA'R.»g n§ VPRATAP amen BAHADUR vs. THAKUR
"N-.AN§:oHAN DEY AND OTHERS (AIR 1966 so 1931) also
help the petitioners, mom particularly, when the
'4 in the instant cases are situate E11 reserve forest. On
the other hand, in thc casizof COLLECTOR OF' BOMBAY VS.
noticed, in the instant cases, any act by mvenuf; .,
conumy to the notification of 1904 cannot V'
right to the petitioners. That V'
Annexure-V series in w.P.No.29?3§";.2o?)GtoLTT
the certificate issued therein Vgnaieam
shown as redeemed " soilfieflgycaring
with regard to timber vaiv1fe,V:' take away the
nature of the rcac;§i+*ev__for:§3£" land is
in respect: of me; been remover}
after _ timber gvowth. The
said eoli-Qcpt only to the mvenuc lands on
which gmwi 'A mmoved. The unreported
V dccisigii 2:; mg STATE OF KARNATAKA 85 ORS vs.
VL"cidm4E:RcIAL ;l;I'MBER ENTERPRISE AND OTHERS
ma (1313) on 20.1.1975) mm on by the
' _ in redeemed land is in the admitted case
érfxoofi'a;: kinds and so far as revenue entries to change
& tine' nzgium of reserve forest lands, the same would not be of
.Q:V'.g_s_§§;istance. 'Redeemed' is (£3 when timber value is paid by
$1
~62
a owner of the land and as such the " " 'V
becomes his own since he is the of tiee
tree has grown. The
013' a debt'. Therefore, if the and
the debt towards trees :'tl1e-teatter ttzeu land as
Well as the trees own. But
when the land as his own,
the tree his own even if the
tirnber since one happens
to be in «or tenant. Hence in so far as
nature of the benefit of redeem cannot be
V' ;»_A--to tibiest since irrespective of removal of
the value, such land would continue to
fo-zest until the same is denotified. That
'being documents relied on in both the said Writ
cannot be accepted fin' determining the right of the
___"'t:'pet§tioner5 as claimed and that too in a Writ Petition under
" 226 ofthe eonsemaion of India, wherein this Court is
exercising the Iimited ju%sdictioz1 while detexmiiling the
'59.
5}
and thereafter the raw of assessment $212313 be 85.2
but tile: said ram ghalfi be subject to revision at .
years. In juxtaposition to what is c9ntaiJ3ec1--Sza.ici'--r1:dg:', " =
the form of demise in the schediflg woxiid;
(1) that that rerserve Pa;i$a.ri forgst ;
cultivation shalt} be ?:.231~v:eui:1V:A.?§1t mi' Rs.5/ -- per acre
which is si1ni_Ia;j*m_. ffllause (2) of the
form of :ie1'.;;'.t7..:'«'s:"v: taken 511811 be free
of gove;j1:;;;3:e11fi'::';§E;:2,:;§ VTher€afte1"* the rate sf
rent ....facre which 31131} be iiabie for
rsvisi0n 3tL"th€ The contents of the said
C13'L15fa'€"iS simiiezt Vto'Su1;$--c1aus& (ii) in {he rules in a1} respects
"rix<iépt :'*fh.a%X~1;_hsa W<:sr::i 'assessment' is used in the rules
A-..ijt1:~t:_Ttz=:ati».§§%t3:19:A'm%?§;>rd 'went' as used in the indenture. in the
re¥ii.s__<:€i v_ru}.r_:::§w* iietified (331 1.2.1913 also the iease of reserve
forest Iand for filbbfii' cuitivatien is contained in
_i«2x2a_3.e"%'s«--'% whens: the upset price is simiiar and the 'assessment'
pzizyabifi: is izidicataé at R1115 453 as being fffifi of assessment
for the first eight years fl at RS.2/ ~ per acre thereafter and
5
'.31
CA
fit} (isuiét that fizere is 2: right avaiiabia fits: mvisgiiig
at "$316 and of 36 j»,«*t:a1's. 811%,, since 'ihé C{;Ir.?ilTf;Ef§':"1*C)V§ZV'€3i:€')€'3-._S :e1t:>"§._
Stipulatfi €333 enhanced ratfi: or azésioigiit €223?!
paywabie at am: $1111 of 30 .._a§1d" i£1e1*eaft§:::;'*:Vvf;§i€§ same
Could be reviseé Eiiflhfiifz by "-§1' c:get:iati0A:1V-gar if {he
gavemmezzt. had pas;se{'i"aA';_;yV fi%.:§,§h regard to thc
revision of ::at:z::s,:i1'z.'_ 'rfispééft "'iZ3f}E'. $81116 Shfllfid
have £33213. '}.aA.r§'§s$e:§f::"fi'iV3VL.=;iicant3Lr1g the rate of
Ian? to be 11(I3i€'d that in fhfi
inden£u_:~e,~. it likely to 19¢ ravised. :3 the
deCis.is::un rit'3f%rre§ saxzicsr Counsel in the case
ax" .a_;j;:';mANG;aD§R>Ai:&, OTHERS -wvs~ B3fc"I'RiCT FOREST
'v:'C32?T_:E'53CEfl'Ei§, r§:23.§:URA1AM) OTHERS (AIR 3985 MADRAS 1&4}
vAV.[ix1::fE:f1*1*<%t:1 for different purpose}, it is held that
G0Vam1;ié1;;£«:'has the pewer to enhance mm but such pcwssr
Vfihould '=55 exercised in reascmabicé mazmer and Such
":3:13aa_£icement. fihouid be: pmspfzctive and met ratrospective.
vé rérgard is revision of rent, the iaarnad Advocats Gamma}
V' wafers {:3 Anny-:xure.R--15 filed along with that? ::>¥:}je<:ti0n
)2
'$-
(J,
W}
statement which hldicateés thai it is a comfliumcs;-130:1.
$7. 1974 from the Secretary, £}ov&:*I1mc::1£: pf "a;<;§ K '
the: Chief Cetmsexvaisr of §~'orests§; H{x7Ii¢:*¢ii1 i:7:'s.,25Q,Z_- "iva§.
imiicateé with ragard to e1'~:sai ir?&r:_--"A:f$r:fi:s "'ba1£'a.c¢§>1{i~ifi€g"'té§ the
respondent was made a;.}p1ic§33}sV:A.t§3. é:_?§: ca$és;;vv--.Th$ cfirculai'
daiteci 18.3.1995 at isszmfi by .PCCfiF'
regard:E3::s,g rent perusal of. the
impugggd has neticed is
that flag; ietasc rent payable as
Rs.2:3{;%g» 19:74 zmfi 323.525/_ }}€1'h&C'{3I'€
fmrm 14996', $0 ciiszzussican as to Whether the
33131:; 'is. _ap}3}ic@bj}& t::3 Cass of the peiitisners. when that
,...«.,s;3;'?¥" rio;é: 'i:hé A~3dmitt{§: ci rate of mat, the {)8}? couid not have
the same far the purpese oi'c31cu}afic3I1.
N<j»..§VieuE%'t,' %:i1éV' EEC? who is at Forest Gfiicer as dsfmeci in
V'-..S€:cti:3iz.. 2{5} of the Act 196:3, Weuld have the power to recover
I.h.£_::f 'figmxey due ':0 $116: Gavemméfit as conttimpiatsti undgr
Sééction 109 of tha szaici Act. Further, the Hofifbie Stzpreme
Czzauxt Whflfi c0}:1sic16z'ing}2a similar }3I'0ViSiQI} under fiat of
u
T:
61
impugzzed 9311313 on this aspect Wauki indic§ai;é:i
department has suddenly wcakén up b_f1'om_-ifs-"u
saught for dctafls regaxdilttg perivélis V,f'i'ii£?':i1'fLf2%l§£i{ii'a1:35 3:>}f
history. In any event, the Vo:'§i::{:':*s z¥«'%;v.u3:i_V_ii1c1V.icé«ViE4i.Vj;'v £316
Fsrtzsi Gfficcz" insteadv _pez:§'{3i*:1:;§.}r;',;r'V:V"iZ'1_¢én1* Qhsn they
czughi to have are BOW t;a}{i::.g églfxe issues raised
$3; iihfi ;%cco1::3.ta.1§§Tt?.C;a:1{;%%.~§'E;b orders appszsj' to
be 01113:' azp' ::"5{?1:§:;efo1°e, the DC?' has
;):*oceecvija{V§..Vgiififn' z;;'}§,:;;: :1ofici3;:1g tin": zfiaaséizg
O1'dF'3€ (:ji_;13:*1Tz:g "£13 £985 and has calculated
t%1£~: 'i:1'm?;3eé1'* Though, iihf; <:~e1"tifi<.:ate anti
Oftiiilfé 'whiifh ¢':i1"'C~..,§ii 'A:"mexurat:*V' series 'ware not pr9i:¥'11Ced
beibre the BC? in the pmcéredings, they
L';<;'i:1«:}-€_1lsiV"i§é:3,«%€V...):;:v;é§e11 a part ecaf the" records Sines the
assé1'mpi:.ji¥:S:1::~'have aiso been made based an the rétcmtis.
'}:"'3<3<if_ saici {:e1"tifi<::ates and orders wouid ;indicate that
_ 'p:i'mi:~;':si011 was acrzrarded by treaii11g it as Ifideemeé.
V. Thiéugh, that W'a$ a misconception, the same required
~ det:ai}.ed consideration, since the dcpartment while
is
regard in the authority of the State Govelnment, "
given to the respective ofiiaens is
Rule 69 of the Rules. The Ieiathig to 3:»; is A
assigned to the Chief vizrfi and
Conmrvator of Forests. v flfhat the pzeeeeetiings of
the Govemment which ieg by
obtaining a Act, it is seen
that the the year 1990 in View
of the Hon'ble Minister for
Forest : "relating to the very same
petitioners the said pm-oeedrizugs were
'~ .})asi.';§:§IyE alleged violations of the
said notings at note No.33, the period
of f xeferred to and a doubt is expmssed
'ewith mt "No the validity of 1educ3n' g the period.
x V' 13¢' ' as it may, :10 final decisien appears to have
taken by the State Government 110!' is any xzsmterial
T on by the DC?-F t9 indicate that pursuant to
" the Rule made in l94(},¥be demise made in favour of the
peiitienels which was in the nature of a Z u b
altered between the parties. That
R43 produced by the mspondengs with the V
statement is an exchange b§etvVnveen
Governor General of
Rubber Company. V The indenture-
of lease dataedg of lands
are made bf} pfoperties instead of
schwu1g:%-AT e egg eiL*eemeJ'ef'I3:;di:ates that it refers
to the aagz" for 999 years and
thereafter etésee property is transferred
V' une§erv*--%l';e terms and eondifions and for the
the said lease deed dated 12.9.1918.
was made afier the 1940 Rules had
These aspecfs have been referred only
that insofar as the period of lease, the
,j.'-'GAO3rer'1A1ment has been heating it in a particular manner
.4 as such, the State Government would have to take
a decision and when no such decision is shown to have
is
58
been taken by the State Government, the O}f'd6I',£"Z=f
with regard be the period of lease is wit11QjL_;£"'3uriSc%i§;ii0'r_:;: _& b'
when the authsrity whost: order is;'§"i1éS§iQ:'2.e<i-; :1-=::I;V }:1 avé:7
the j11i'iS(fi{3t§(}Il, the Qrder r€:q11ir£:$V"Igo1'b§: quavshéd
J?
aspect 0111}? 011 that ground Cofifi the V
merits ta: came to a co:1c}.31si0:2V"i*c§;a1'§'§ii:gfl flzé «ptzrioiii of Iease
Wonk}. be like putting :55 It is only, if
the State Go\fc:::§*fi1¢ut:_"V£g§:1{g%--;}, ucontrary" to the
intrzrest. of. -._'tV}1& ijfifizjéééness or otherwise
would .f:;1fi_$¢: " all approp1'iatf: pmceeriings
Sifficfi 's;%j$:'E;.':fi*%i::'.:%»,»'"i;1§é~._p.3f.iti021£:rs' ifitezfist under the
i11{1e11tu£z§ Vievafie undistzzrbeé 11131633 it is
alterigif is: :i1e"'m¢.{Iiner' kxzwwn :0 law. Further, the vazj;
'V'fs:,2,1§§5£:%t £3 thfi prmeed;i11g$ msuétitzg 3111 {ha
'émpug1n€<§i"--oj:fiis§rv .*éi<'0'u}<i indicate that it was towarrig rént and
ti131%3«;r:z° Vf2'aE1££:' Aha: uitizriataljg the perioii is iifitezznifled.
'".__ "*£'jr1€jr::f$:;>s:<,A:' file siecigiran 91" tha BC?' that pctrioxi of 163.36 is for
"~L?9 ig unszxsiaénablftfor want Gf jurisdictiaim to &e<:*31:ie
1'.
69*
thai €~1S§3€Ct mad as such the: same is Eiabie to be qz1a,$h»:*;§iT~9n
that grcaund. _. »
zmaazmme NOTICE 1):': 4.5.2000 rw.p.No.;2#353'g§0a§§}LT
AND 91*: 213.2000 fW.P.No. 3oo2;_<_2§;aoo1:M< V'
224. By the said notice' §.ssued',._ the petiiioziers have
been regtrained fmm cutting"V'VL"fi*§es_V pemiing
litigafion and the areaTéé'i;1g sgontenfion
of the learned Counsel fo ;fV_ivii'1A§:V Sectiaix 8('?')
91" Tree rubber {res and
as such ti1t'i.I"% in this bacl«:g1"0un:i, a
peruki. that the said Act
exte11d$ to"L7'r.1aq of Karnataka but one of the
abjects in b :"ingiz1gV'V:3§3c'_ut' mstrictions as stated to in the
;_z'a§1d__ reas§)§n's------t0' Act 1'~§a::>.'?6/ 1976 vmzild indicate that
tapé§1'"?: _t3{'m:»;{ii é:::cmce::.n cf desuuction of tree growth in urban}
mas, the 'f3_ro:¥:ectie1z af tree g;tt:>w't}1 in all areas was also
i3.t€Iif£1€tC§.'«.f3fld hence in ;:;;;.}='' view, though the said pmvision
A ..:'jv¢:}§<ém.;gts rubber trees, LEE: sazne 0311110: be extended to the
'-.
70
rubber tmcs which are gmwn in the reserve _
the cultivation of rubber is '4 " =
because under the rules framed, ig-:_
permitted even in a resexve fomstggnd 3&3 éfllch
of the Tree Preservation Act 'tzvict-téflcazanot
be made use of for tIEgt;B VW'ithOl.lt
mstriction in a apart, the
proviso insertcriv : ;:;:#'*'i;y"%'%}§g§%t%''N532; 9a with eflwct
fiom 11.5.1é§8 felling of an
tmes forfv culfivatiozt of rubber.
Though, itidoé.s- rubber tunes, the object of
denudation vfiixevcnmd cannot be ignered. In
addiaiién :_'Rnm A1» Ar€a""is'defined in Sacticm 29:} as the land'
I and H. Schedulrrl refers to areas
mmyrm; firubber ctc., in lands belonging to the State
vand released in favour of others. The Tree
Tgzigiidzafty is separate for Scheduler] and II as mama-,d in
3 of the Act. In addition, Section 'I casts obligation
.4 BEES. Hence, the entire scheme of the Act ahouid
1
.-
¢.
E'é:;*es{tC . "
'T-"'4
ORDER
'§'}::e: arders ciaied 14.3.2305 and 2533-..;2{}€)€) {AnnexUzres-T and 'F« 1} and (Am1ex1xre.W~2), E115: ortier datefi (Ax1I:1€:X:1:r€:~J) asad the. »<:;a1"=d¢1* K x (An11t:xure--.L) in W.P.No.2436S3/ 2Cé3_:':~'--..._ Vv»r,9.TB;§.A'?19'4V3/2001 = "
mspective1y__to the Vcxut§;21t'af d€{§Ia:3T.:;g fifie nature of 12:11:13 in qfiérsiién anti it is ajffizmed that {he sai<i"}:3ui1dS'* are ;;i2;c;§i=:3;é; 0f the Reserva '§Th?€=-- 1fab<:>x»' e é-aid A 1:9 thtf exiezlt of ' .{A1fr::Vi;é:+ifV1:r.";if3.;i1t1g..M f32§ 0utstamli11g mm anti timber " mad the mattm' is refemeii ta fi51x3 if;£3: 1sei'"-i3.to:'* of Forests {:3 halt} ail eiaqiliry uazgd p3;§§' ap§aropria£e ordsrs in {firms of Sa:s.%3- " :1- €j'<,=:téi_«'m1 {2} to Sectiozl 109 of 1:116 Eiarfiataka nI+?<3i*est Act, B363, kee:;3ing in View 31$ ebsézvatiazzs made during the 0021133 0:' the is 2: ~ Néa, .
".75 arciax', COI}S€3Cfi1€11fl}', recovery __ '}:"iIT}tZi<.'f'f"'~ ::}1z,~.rVt:é:~3.--.: _ V' 28.8.2{}GG galmexum-';)' '«?.fiP;.Nc3;2§f?;3_€§.[V2GQ0'. Stands quashfsd, _ Tile above said ''''vL.§5i'd:erS . 'E53. V 'Eh? AV3&".,"?\{r:éi3i: of VV dfitrzrmining .f_hEf pr::r*i0d_ 0f "i:..=._ase aS'99""y'€ars are held as one ;_ \R'ii:h<§L'£i '_j;i1f'i$Cii:?{i€)1} and are accciifiiingiyfi;{;;;u$S§§ied: éxfiézat. '3¥.n;«g'ticei_ ..___ éatéki 1998, 24.9 2 993,
- _§a,2:.§2£::Q0 w .V{A 1i1§€§§--z::1?e:=§§--B, E and G} ''21:
- 'sr.!..::5'.;='~éf;:.,§'3:§3:2€3;/'20:3r§, names dated 123.2004 ,(A::;1é'xa_.g£-e:};a), 'W3 M35509 ,1 2084 and notice €ia{f:€}; V 30. 1 1.2004 (Ann€Xu3:t:»A} in .:W..P.§*§0.8187[2Q{)5 insofar as demaizding the .,_3;E:::{3i,"1I1t art: treateé as shew cause noticag fizeaii ' {ha eaqtiirjsg to be heid by the Cmléervator Sf Rrarests in tha maxlner stated at {ii} above Tim Chaliangfi is neticte datrzd *~¥~.5.;20{}{3 {.A1mr::x'ure~»NE) and 21.17.2009 (fi1111€xs.1ré-LE} 3.31 W.P.N0.243é3/Zfiflfl and W,P.?€0.3{}02G/2989 a 9
vi) e Akc:/ above. "wifli. order as to costs.
respectively regarding ban on felling"
disposed ofwith the clarification as b the course of the order. 'V b i I The notice dated _2o.4.e0oo'=. ii W.P.No.30020/2000""'fljnsofer"
encroachmeni '_~~.. in aétioneii V' under Section 64-A oifi .-1i%::i'tvAA.i;i5'i_(ii.istL1rbed with }ib€l;'1j7"tQVV:"thC ::pet_;iti.-finerxs" iall contentions we If disposed of in the we