Karnataka High Court
Chittimadri Ramchandraiah vs The Principle Secretary And Ors on 25 November, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060
WP No. 201240 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.201240 OF 2021 (GM-FOR)
BETWEEN:
CHITTIMADRI RAMCHANDRAIAH
S/OCHITTIMADRI BALAIAH @ BALADU
SINCE DECEASED BY LR'S
1(A) CHITTIMADRI BHIMAMMA
W/O LATE CHITTIMADRI RAMACHANDRAIAH,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O MAGDAMPUR, POST: KUNCHAVARAM,
TQ: CHINCHOLI, DIST: KALABURAGI.
1(B) CHITTAMADRI YADAPPA
S/O LATE CHITTIMADRI RAMACHANDRAIAH,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O MAGDAMPUR, POST: KUNCHAVARAM,
Digitally signed TQ: CHINCHOLI, DIST: KALABURAGI.
by SUMITRA
SHERIGAR
1(C) CHITTIMADRI NARSIMULU
Location: HIGH
COURT OF S/O LATE CHITTIMADRI RAMACHANDRAIAH,
KARNATAKA AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O TURMAMIDI, BANTWARAM,
K.V. RANGAREDDY, ANDRAPRADESH-501 142.
1(D) JOGINI YELLAMMA
D/O LATE CHITTIMADRI RAMACHANDRAIAH,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O TURMAMIDI, BANTWARAM,
K.V. RANGAREDDY, ANDRAPRADESH-501 142.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060
WP No. 201240 of 2021
AND:
1. THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
MULTISTORIED BUILDING,
VIDHANASOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THEDEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI-585 102,
KALABURAGI.
3. THEASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
SEDAM SUBDIVISION,
SEDAM-585 102.
4. THETAHASILDAR, CHINCHOLI,
TQ. CHINCHOLI,
DIST. KALABURAGI.
5. THECONSERVATOR OFFOREST,
S.B.TEMPLE ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585 103.
6. THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,
S.B. TEMPLE ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585 103.
7. THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER,
CHINCHOLI, TQ. CHINCHOLI,
DIST: KALABURAGI.
8. THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR,
KONCHAWARAM POLICE STATION,
TQ. CHINCHOLI, DIST: KALBURAGI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G. B. YADAV, HCGP)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO,
(A) ISSUE AN ORDER OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060
WP No. 201240 of 2021
DATED 15.12.2019 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.6 VIDE
ANNEXURE-G; (B) ISSUE ORDER OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 5 NOT TO
DISPOSSESS THE PETITIONER FROM THE PETITION LAND
BEARING SY.NO.162 MEASURING 10 ACRES SITUATED AT
MOGADAMPUR VILLAGE, TQ. CHINCHOLI, DIST. KALABURAGI,
WITHOUT FOLLOWING DUE PROCESS OF LAW; (C) ISSUE
ORDER OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING
THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 5 TO ENTER THE NAME OF
PETITIONER TO THE PETITION LAND BEARING SY.NO.162
MEASURING 10 ACRES SITUATED AT MOGADAMPUR VILLAGE,
TQ. CHINCHOLI, DIST. KALABURAGI; (D) ANY OTHER RELIEF
TO WHICH THE PETITIONER IS ENTITLED MAY KINDLY BE
GRANTED.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) In this petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:
"a) Issue an order of certiorari to quash the order dated 15.12.2019 passed by respondent No.6 vide Annexure-G.
b) Issue order or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to 5 not to dispossess the petitioner from the petition land bearing Sy.No.162 measuring 10 acres situated at -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 Mogadampur village, Tq. Chincholi, Dist.
Kalaburagi, without following due process of law.
c) Issue order or writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos.2 to 5 to enter the name of petitioner to the petition land bearing Sy.No.162 measuring 10 acres situated at Mogadampur village, Tq. Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi.
d) Any other relief to which the petitioner is entitled may kindly be granted."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that, it is the specific contention of the petitioners that the original petitioner is the absolute owner in lawful and peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject land and without following due process of law, nor the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act Land Revenue Act, 1964, the Tahsildar entered the name of the Karnataka State Forest Department in the revenue records in relation to the subject land, pursuant to which, respondent -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 No.5 proceeded to pass the impugned eviction order at Annexure-G dated 15.12.2019 without complying with the mandatory requirements contained in Section 64A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and in violation of principles of natural justice and also without conducting necessary enquiry in this regard and as such, the impugned order passed by the 6th respondent deserves to be quashed. In support of their contentions, petitioners place reliance upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Laxmamma W/o Late Devaiah vs. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and Others (W.P. No.225710/2020 C/w W.P. No.225706/2020, D.D. 18.06.2020) as well as the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of V.Sampangi Ramaiah vs. The Director/Commissioner, Department of Mines & Geology and Others (W.P. No.36792/2011, D.D. 11.12.2012). It is therefore submitted that the impugned order deserves to be quashed.
4. Per contra learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would support the impugned order and reiterate the various contentions urged in the -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 statement of objections and submit that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. Before adverting to the rival contentions, it is significant to note that in Laxmamma W/o Late Devaiah's case supra, this Court has held that before passing any order under Section 64-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, it is incumbent upon the respondent authorities to conduct necessary enquiry in accordance with law and provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. In the said judgment, it was held as under:
"Though the matter is coming up for preliminary hearing, with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. These two petitions are heard together since common questions of law and facts arise for decision making.
3. The petitioners in both these petitions claim to have been granted agricultural lands in Sy.Nos.140 and 162 of Mogadampur village, -7- NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 Chincholi taluk, Kalaburagi district, way back in the year 1967. It is contended that by order of the Deputy Commissioner, Kalaburagi, the Tahsildar granted the said lands in favour of the petitioner in W.P.No.225706/2020 and in favour of one Dandu Pochager who is said to be the grand father-in-law of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioners are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in question and have been paying the taxes regularly. However, it is submitted that the taxes for the latest period may not have been paid. Somewhere in the year 2003, the officials of the Department of Forest tried to evict the petitioners on the premise that the lands in question are forest lands. The petitioners were informed that around 60 acres in Sy.Nos.140 and 162 notified as forest lands are allegedly in unauthorized occupation of the petitioners and other villagers. It is submitted that during the said period the names of the petitioners were removed from the revenue records. Nevertheless, it is submitted that the petitioners continued to be in possession and peaceful enjoyment of the lands in question. It is further submitted that off late, the forest officials are making hectic efforts to evict the petitioners from the lands in question. Therefore, these writ petitions are filed with a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents -8- NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 not to dispossess the petitioners from the lands in question. A prayer is also made seeking a direction to the respondents to re-enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents brings to the notice of this Court that the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Kalaburagi Sub-Division has passed an order dated 15.12.2019 which would show that the local villagers, including the petitioners herein had encroached upon the forest lands in Sy.Nos.140 and 162 of Mogadumpur village and therefore the villagers were summoned and a summary enquiry was held. Thereafter, the order of summary eviction has been issued on 15.12.2019. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the information provided in the said order is incorrect. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no such enquiry was held and neither was the said order dated 15.12.2019 served upon the petitioners.
5. The learned Government Advocate would further draw the attention of this Court to Section 64A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (for short the 'Act') to submit that where any person is in unauthorized occupation of any forest land, without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against the occupier under the other -9- NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 provisions of the Act, a forest officer not below the rank of an Assistant Conservator of Forest can summarily evict the unauthorized occupant.
6. However, to a pointed question posed by this Court as to how the Assistant Conservator of Forest could come to a conclusion that the petitioners are unauthorized occupants, since they were pattadars, having been granted with the lands by the competent authority of the Department of Revenue, the learned Government Advocate is unable to give a satisfactory answer. Insofar as Section 64A of the Act is concerned, the proviso to clause(1) of Section 64A of the Act very clearly provides that before evicting a person under the sub-section, he or she shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
7. In the light of the assertions and the documentary evidence that have been produced by the petitioners along with these writ petitions, prima facie, the Assistant Conservator of Forest could not have held that the petitioners are unauthorized occupants. If an opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners, they would have substantiated their possession and occupation of the lands in question by production of title deeds and revenue records. If a proper enquiry was held, it is possible that the petitioners would be able to substantiate their authorized occupation with
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 respect to the lands in question. It is also possible that the petitioners may have encroached upon lands beyond what was granted to them. On enquiry, if the competent authority of the Forest Department finds that though the petitioners were granted lands by the competent authority of the Revenue Department even before the notification of Sy.Nos.140 and 162 as forest lands, then the other question would arise as to whether the petitioners could be declared as unauthorized occupants of forest lands. These are all questions that may arise during the course of enquiry. Since two departments of the State Government are involved in this issue, necessarily joint inspection and joint survey has to be held and recorded in the presence of the officials of both the departments as well as the petitioners.
8. Be that as it may, on a plain reading of the order dated 15.12.2019 passed by the Assistant Conservator of Forest, it does not animate such an enquiry. Therefore, the action on the part of the officials of the Forest Department including passing of the summary eviction order dated 15.12.2019, requires to be held as illegal and arbitrary.
9. During the course of argument, the learned Government Advocate had also pointed out that the officials of the Forest Department have taken up afforestation in the lands in question. It is
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 the contention of the officials of the Forest Department that saplings have been planted in the lands in question, and they need protection till the enquiry is conducted by the competent authority. However, the said submission cannot be accepted in view of the fact that a summary eviction order even according to the respondents was issued only on 15.12.2019 and without the same being brought to the notice of the petitioners.
10. For the reasons stated above, the writ petitions are allowed in part. The order dated 15.12.2019 passed by the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Kalaburagi Sub-Division, which was produced by the learned Government Advocate during the course of the hearing is hereby quashed and set aside, insofar as the petitioners are concerned. However, it is made clear that the competent authority of the Forest Department, acting under the provisions of the Karnataka Forest Act or any other statute, may proceed in accordance with law by issuing a notice to the petitioners, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, conduct joint inspection or joint survey in the presence of the officers of the Department of Forest, Revenue and the petitioners herein and thereafter proceed to pass orders in accordance with law. Till such time, the respondents are hereby directed not to dispossess or interfere in the
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 petitioners' peaceful possession of the lands belonging to the petitioners, to the extent stated in the writ petitions.
11. In the light of the said situation, it is also incumbent that the enquiry has to be conducted in a time bound manner. Therefore, the forest officials are required to hold an enquiry in accordance with law and thereafter pass orders as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Till then the parties are required to maintain status-quo with respect to the possession of their respective lands.
12. As regards the second prayer of the petitioners that the respondents should be directed to re-enter the name of the petitioners in the revenue records, the same cannot be granted at this stage since admittedly the entries have been removed way back in the year 2003. The petitioners are required to follow the due procedure of law as contemplated in the Karnataka Land Revenue Act to redress their grievance.
The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of."
6. In V.Sampangi Ramaiah's case supra, while dealing with relevant provisions under the Karnataka Forest Act
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 relating to reserved forests, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court held as under:
"In this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 30/07/2011 passed by the second respondent - Joint Director and Revisional Authority, South Zone, Mysore (Annexure "A") and has sought a direction to extend the validity of the lease for the period for which the petitioner was illegally prevented from carrying on quarrying activities. during the subsistence of the Quarrying Lease Deed No.105. A direction is also sought for renewal of the quarrying lease to the extent of 10 Acres, for a further period of ten years.
2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was granted a quarrying lease in respect of 12.30 Acres of land bearing Sy.No.601/A-1 of Mudigunda village, Kollegal Taluk (for short, "the quarry"). According to the petitioner, the quarry is in the revenue land and he had been carrying on quarrying and stone crushing operations after obtaining all relevant statutory clearances for setting up of a stone crushing unit on the land and by making substantial investments. The stone crushing unit became operational in August 2004. When the matter stood thus, the petitioner received a notice dated 08/07/2005 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Kollegal Division, calling upon the
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 petitioner to stop all quarrying operations and also to discontinue the stone crushing unit within 24 hours. The same was assailed in W.P.No.17941/2005, which was allowed by order dated 16/08/2007 and the notice was quashed.
3. During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, third respondent - Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Chamarajanagar Division, Chamarajanagar, cancelled the lease which was assailed in Revision Petition No.325/2005 before the second respondent - Joint Director. The same was allowed by order dated 03/10/2007.
4. In the meanwhile, the Assistant Commissioner, Kollegal, was appointed as the Forest Settlement Officer by the State Government, to enquire into the existence of any rights or claims of persons as per the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter, referred to as the "Act"), pursuant to the Preliminary Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the said Act dated 03/06/1991. A communication dated 18/01/2007 was issued to the petitioner in that regard, copies of the aforesaid documents are produced as Annexure "K" and "L"
respectively. In the meeting held on 20/01/2007 under the chairmanship of the Forest Settlement Officer - cum - Assistant Commissioner, it was decided to exclude 366.63 Acres of land and the
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 balance 617.71 Acres was to be constituted as reserved forest land out of a total extent of 984.34 Acres in Sy.No.601/A1. This decision was informed to the third respondent.
5. When the matter stood thus, another notice dated 17/10/2008 was issued to the petitioner, asking him to stop all quarrying operations and not to transport the quarrying material till further orders. The same was assailed in W.P.No.13708/2008 and by order dated 25/06/2009, the said writ petition was also allowed and the notice was quashed with liberty to the second respondent therein, to hold a detailed enquiry with regard to the nature of the land and to pass orders in accordance with law. During the pendency of this writ petition, the lease period came to an end and an application for renewal has been filed by the petitioner seeking renewal with regard to 10 Acres of land out of 12.30 Acres granted originally. By endorsement dated 08/01/2010, the petitioner was informed that the lands sought by him for renewal of the lease is notified as a reserved forest, a copy of which is produced as Annexure "B". Assailing the same, a revision petition was filed, which has been dismissed. Hence, this writ petition.
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
6. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for both parties.
7. It is contended by the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the endorsement rejecting the renewal of the lease is illegal as the same is predicated on the fact that in respect of Sy.No.601/A1, notification under Section 4(1) of the Act has been issued and therefore, no permission can be granted for either removal of the quarrying materials or for renewal of the quarrying lease. It is stated that the said notification has been issued as early as in the year 1991 namely, 03/06/1991 and since then, proceedings under the said Act have not been concluded in as much as the said notification has not fructified into a declaration as envisaged under Section 17 of the Act. In the absence of steps being taken, it must be assumed that the State Government has virtually given up its intention to notify Sy.No.601/A1 as Reserved Forest and hence, at this point of time, the State Government cannot rely on the Preliminary Notification. It is also contended that subsequent to the issuance of the Preliminary Notification the subject quarrying lease was granted to the petitioner in the year 2004 and therefore the issuance of the subsequent orders were illegal. This Court has rightly allowed the earlier writ petitions filed by the petitioner and
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 pursuant to the order dated 25/06/2009, liberty was given to the second respondent to hold a detailed enquiry about the nature of the land in respect of which, the lease has been granted to the petitioner and to pass orders accordingly. But the order passed by the Revisional Authority-assailing the rejection of the application of renewal on 11/01/2010 - is illegal as the said order is passed without hearing the applicant. Further, the order rejecting the revision petition and affirming the rejection of the renewal licence on the basis that petitioner has failed to produce documents supporting that the quarrying is outside the forest boundary, is also incorrect, since it is for the Department to identify the extent of the reserved forest. In the instant case, since there has been no declaration made with regard to the reserved forest by issuance of notification under Section 17 of the Act, there is no impediment for the renewal of the quarrying lease.
8. Per contra, learned AGA, placed reliance on Article 48-A as well as Article 51-A(g) of the Constitution of India, which deal with the protection and improvement of natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures, which is a Directive Principle and that every citizen's Fundamental Duty is to protect natural environment including forest
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 etc. He therefore, submitted that having regard to the Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, no quarrying lease could have been granted in the reserved forest and therefore, the renewal licence has been rightly rejected.
9. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and on perusal of the material on record, we note that by a notification dated 03/06/1991 issued under Section 4 of the Act, certain areas including Sy.No.601/A1 was notified for the purpose of a reserved forest. Though several steps have to be taken in time, before an extent of land is declared to be a reserved forest culminating in the issuance of the declaration under Section 17 of the Act, indubitably, no such declaration has been made in the instant case. On the other hand, after the issuance of a Preliminary Notification dated 03/06/1991, the subject land has been granted to the petitioner for quarrying purposes in February 2004. There have been several cases filed by the petitioner seeking reliefs against the Department as and when notices/orders were passed or the Department had impeded carrying of the quarrying operations as well as the stone crushing unit. Reliance is placed on Annexure "M" by the petitioner, which is the proceedings of the meeting held under the Chairmanship of the Forest Settlement Officer, who is also the Assistant
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 Commissioner of Kollegal Sub-division, wherein, it has been decided and resolved that 366.63 Acres in Sy.No.601/A1 be retained as revenue land and 617.71 Acres out of 984.34 Acres be treated as reserved forest, to be included as part of Madumalai Forest and subsequently, communication in that regard has been addressed by the Assistant Commissioner to the Deputy Director dated 22/01/2007, a copy of which has been issued to the petitioner also. Such being the position, the Revisional Authority could not have ignored the proceedings dated 22/01/2007 and instead cast, the burden on the petitioner to show that the subject quarry was outside the forest land. As noted above, after the preliminary notification had been issued, the quarrying lease was granted to the petitioner. That apart, we find that for over a period of two decades, the proposal to notify the reserved forest including Sy.No.601/A1 has not culminated in the issuance of the declaratory notification under Section 17 of the Act. As a result, there has been no declaration that the subject quarry is within a reserved forest. In this context, the relevant provisions of the Act needs to be perused. For the purpose of immediate reference, Section 2(14) and Section 3 to Section 18 of the Act are extracted:-
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 Section 2: Definitions: In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires.-
(14) "Reserved Forest" means any land settled and notified as such in accordance with the provisions of Chapter II of this Act;
Section 3: Powers to constitute reserved forests: The State Government may constitute any land which is the property of the Government or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole, or any part of the forest produce of which the Government is entitled, a reserved forest in the manner hereinafter provided.
4. Notification by Government: (1) Whenever it has been decided to constitute any land a reserved forest the State Government shall issue a notification.-
(a) declaring that it has been decided to constitute such land a reserved forest;
(b) specifying, as nearly as possible, the situation and limits of such land; and
(c) appointing an officer (hereinafter called the "Forest Settlement Officer") to inquire into and determine the existence, nature and extent of any rights claimed by or alleged to exist in favour of any person in or over any land comprised within such limits or in or over
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 any forest produce, and to deal with the same as provided in this Chapter.
Explanation: For the purpose of clause (b) it shall be sufficient to describe the limits of the forest by roads, rivers, bridges, or other well- known or readily intelligible boundaries.
(2) The officer appointed under clause (c) of sub- section (1) shall, be a person not holding any forest office except that of Forest Settlement Officer; but a Forest Officer may be appointed by the State Government to represent it in the inquiry under this Chapter by the Forest Settlement Officer.
5. Proclamation by Forest Settlement Officer: When a notification has been issued under Section 4, the Forest Settlement Officer shall publish in Kannada and in any other regional language of the area, at the headquarters of each taluk in which any portion of the land comprised in such notification is situate and in every town and village in the neighbourhood of such land a proclamation.-
(a) specifying, as nearly as possible, the situation and limits of the proposed forest;
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
(b) setting forth the substance of the provisions of Section 6;
(c) explaining the consequences which, as hereinafter provided, will ensue on such forest being constituted a reserved forest; and
(d) fixing a period of not less than three months from the date of publishing such proclamation, and requiring every person claiming any right or making any claim referred to or mentioned in Section 4, either to present to such officer within such period a written notice specifying or to appear before him within such period and state the nature of such right or claim (if any) and in either case to produce all documents in support thereof. The Forest Settlement Officer shall also serve a notice to the same effect on every known or reputed owner or occupier of any land included in or adjoining the land proposed to be constituted a reserved forest or on his recognised agent or manager. Such notice may be sent by registered post to persons residing beyond the limits of the district in which such land is situate.
6. Bar of accrual of forest rights: (1) After the issue of notification under Section 4, no
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 right shall be acquired in or over the land comprised in such notification, except by succession or under a grant or contract in writing made or entered into by or on behalf of the Government or some person in whom such right, or power to create such right, was vested when the notification was issued; and on such land no new house shall be built or plantation formed, no fresh clearings for cultivation or for any other purpose, shall be made and no trees shall be cut for the purpose of trade or manufacture except as hereinafter provided. No patta or right of occupancy shall without the previous sanction of the State Government be granted, in respect of such land, and every patta or right of occupancy granted without such sanction shall be null and void.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit any act done under the written permission of the Forest Settlement Officer.
(3) No Civil Court shall, between the dates of publication of the notification under Section 4 and of the final notification to be issued under Section 17 entertain any suit to establish any right in or over any land or to the forest produce of any land included in the notification under Section 4.
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
7. Inquiry by Forest Settlement Officer:
The Forest Settlement Officer shall take down in writing all statements made under clause
(d) of Section 5 and shall, at some convenient place, inquire into all claims duly preferred under that section and into the existence and extent of any rights mentioned in Section 4 and not claimed under Section 5 so far as the same may be ascertainable from the records of the Government and the evidence of any person likely to be acquainted with the same.
The Forest Settlement Officer shall at the same time, consider and record any objection which the Forest Officer, if any, appointed under sub-section (2) of Section 4 may make to any such claim or any information which he may afford with regard to the existence and extent of any such right.
8. Powers of Forest Settlement Officer:
For the purpose of such inquiry, the Forest Settlement Officer may exercise the following powers, that is to say.-
(i) power to enter, by himself or any officer authorised by him for the purpose, upon any land, and to survey, demarcate and make a map of the same; and
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
(ii) the powers of a Civil Court in the trial of suits.
9. Extinction of rights: Rights in respect of which no claim, has been preferred under Section 5, and to the existence of which no knowledge has been acquired by inquiry under Section 7, shall be extinguished unless, before the final notification under Section 17 is published, the person claiming them satisfies the Forest Settlement Officer that he had sufficient cause for not preferring such claim within the period fixed under Section 5 in which case the Forest Settlement Officer shall proceed to dispose of the claim as hereinafter provided.
10. Treatment of claims relating to shifting cultivation: (1) In the case of a claim relating to the practice of shifting cultivation, the Forest Settlement Officer shall record a statement setting forth the particulars of the claim and of any local rule or order under which the practice is allowed or regularised, and submit the statement to the State Government, together with his opinion as to whether the practice should be permitted or prohibited wholly or in part.
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 (2) On receipt of the statement and opinion, the State Government may make an order permitting or prohibiting the practice wholly or in part.
(3) If such practice is permitted wholly or in part, the Forest Settlement Officer may arrange for its exercise,-
(a) by altering the limits of the land under settlement, so as to exclude land of sufficient extent, of a suitable kind, and in a locality reasonably convenient for the purposes of the claimants, or
(b) by causing certain portions of the land under settlement to be separately demarcated, and giving permission to the claimants to practice shifting cultivation therein under such conditions as he may prescribe.
(4) All arrangements made under sub-section (3) shall be subject to the previous sanction of the State Government.
(5) The practice of shifting cultivation shall in all cases be deemed a privilege subject to control, restriction and abolition by the State Government.
11. Power to acquire land over which right is claimed: (1) In the case of a claim
- 27 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 to a right in or over any land, other than a right of way or right of pasture, or a right of forest produce or a watercourse or in respect of any building standing on such land, the Forest Settlement Officer shall pass an order admitting or rejecting the same in whole or in part.
(2) If such claim is admitted in whole or in part, the Forest Settlement Officer shall either.-
(i) exclude such land or building from the limits of such reserved forest; or
(ii) come to an agreement with the owner for the surrender of his rights; or
(iii) proceed to acquire such land in the manner provided by the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (3) For the purpose of so acquiring such land or building.-
(a) the Forest Settlement Officer shall be deemed to be a Deputy Commissioner proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894;
(b) the claimant shall be deemed to be a person interested and appearing before him in
- 28 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 pursuance of a notice given under Section 9 of that Act;
(c) the provisions of the preceding sections of that Act shall be deemed to have been complied with; and
(d) the Forest Settlement Officer, with the consent of the claimant, of the Court (as defined in the said Act) with the consent of the claimant and the Deputy Commissioner of the district, may award compensation in land, or partly in land and partly in money.
12. Order on claims to rights of way or pasture or to forest produce or water: In the case of claim to rights of way or pasture or to forest produce or water, the Forest Settlement Officer shall pass an order specifying the particulars of such claims and admitting or rejecting the same in whole in part.
13. Record to be made where claim is admitted: If the Forest Settlement Officer admits, in whole or in part, any claim under Section 12, he shall record the extent to which the claim is so admitted, specifying as far as may be practicable,-
(a) the name, father's name, residence, and occupation of the person claiming the right;
- 29 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
(b) the designation, position and area of all fields or groups of fields (if any) and the designation and position of all buildings (if any) in respect of which the exercise of such rights is claimed;
(c) in the case of rights of way, by whom they may be enjoyed, the width of the way, and whether for vehicular traffic or for men and cattle only, and the conditions, if any, attached to the right;
(d) in the case of pasturage, the number and description of cattle which the claimant is from time to time entitled to graze in the forest, the season during which such pasturage is permitted and any conditions attached to the rights;
(e) in the case of forest produce, the quantity of timber or other forest produce which the claimant is entitled to take or receive, whether the benefit of such timber or other forest produce may be leased, sold or bartered and such other particulars as may be necessary in order to define the nature, incidents and extent of the right;
(f) in the case of water, by whom and for what purposes the water may be utilized, and any condition attached to its use.
- 30 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
14. Exercise of rights admitted: (1) After making such record, the Forest Settlement Officer, shall to the best of his ability and having due regard to the maintenance of the reserved forest in respect of which the claim is made; pass such orders as will ensure the continued exercise of the rights so admitted.
(2) For this purpose, the Forest Settlement Officer may-
(a) provide some other reasonably convenient right of way; or
(b) set out some other forest tract of sufficient extent and in a locality reasonably convenient, for the exercise of rights to pasturage or other forest produce, and record an order conferring such rights on claimants to the admitted extent; or
(c) so alter the limits of the proposed reserved forest as to exclude the tract over which rights of way or water extend or to exclude forest land of sufficient extent and in a locality reasonably convenient for the purpose of the claimants with regard to pasturage or other forest produce and the land so excluded may be either outside the boundaries of the forest as finally settled or within them, in which latter case, it shall be
- 31 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 demarcated and notified as an enclosure within which the rules relating to reserved forests shall not apply; or
(d) record an order, continuing to claimants the right of way or to pasturage or other forest produce or water (as the case may be) to the admitted extent, at such seasons within such portions of the proposed reserved forest, and under such rules, as may be prescribed to ensure the continuance but non- abuse of such rights.
15. Compensation for rights: In case the Forest Settlement Officer finds it impossible, having due regard to the maintenance of the reserved forest, to make such settlement under Section 14, as shall ensure the continued exercise of the said rights to the extent so admitted, he shall direct payment by the State Government of compensation determined on the basis of the value of such right on the date of notification under Section 4, in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, insofar as such provisions are applicable.
16. Appeal from order passed under Section 11, Section 12, Section 14 or Section 15: (1) Any person who has made a
- 32 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 claim under this Chapter or any Forest Officer or other person generally or specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, may, within three months from the date of the order passed on such claim by the Forest Settlement Officer under Section 11, Section 12, or Section 14, appeal to the [Karnataka Appellate Tribunal] and the decision of the said Tribunal on such appeal shall be final.
(2) Any person aggrieved by an order under Section 15, may, within three months from the date of the order appeal to the District Court and the decision of the District Court on such appeal shall be final.
17. Notification declaring forest a reserved forest: (1) When the following events have occurred, namely:-
(a) the period fixed under Section 5 for preferring claims has elapsed, and all claims, if any, made under that section or Section 9 have been disposed of by the Forest Settlement Officer;
(b) If any such claims have been made, the periods limited by Section 16 for appealing from the orders passed on such claims has elapsed and all appeals (if any) presented
- 33 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 within such period, have been disposed of; and
(c) all proceedings prescribed by Section 11 and 14 have been taken and all lands and buildings (if any) to be included in the proposed reserved forest, which the Forest Settlement Officer has under Section 11 elected to acquire under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, have become vested in the Government under Section 16 of that Act, the State Government shall publish a notification specifying clearly according to the boundary marks erected or otherwise, the limits of the forest which is intended to constitute a reserved forest and declaring the same to be a reserved forest from the date fixed by such notification, subject to the exercise of rights (if any) specified in such notification.
(2) From the date so fixed, such forest shall be deemed to be a reserved forest.
18. Publication of notification: The Deputy Commissioner shall before the date fixed by such notification, cause a translation thereof into Kannada and any other regional language of the area, to be published in the official Gazette and at the headquarters of the taluk in which the forest is situated, and in every
- 34 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 town and village in the neighbourhood of such forest, in the manner prescribed for the proclamation under Section 5.
10. The object of the Act is to consolidate the law relating to forest produce in the State of Karnataka. Sub-section 14 of Section 2 defines "Reserved Forest" to mean any land settled and notified as such, in accordance with the produce of Chapter II of the Act. Section 3 empowers the State Government to constitute any land which is the property of the Government or over which the Government has proprietary rights, as a reserved forest. For that purpose, a notification has to be issued under Section 4 of the Act declaring that it has been decided to constitute such land as a reserved forest specifying as nearly as possible, the situation and the limits of such land. An Officer called Forest Settlement Officer has to be appointed to enquire into and determine the existence, nature and extent of any rights claimed by or alleged to exist in favour of any person in or over any land comprised within such limits or in or over any forest produce. Such an Officer shall not be a Forest Officer.
11. The notification issued under Section 4 of the Act can be termed as a Preliminary Notification. The same has to be published by the Forest Settlement Officer under Section 5 and also a copy
- 35 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 of the notice has to be served on every known or owner or occupier of any land included in or adjoining the land proposed to be constituted a reserved forest or on his recognized agent or manager. On the issuance of a notification under Section 4, no right can be acquired in or over the land comprised in the notification except by succession or under a grant or contract in writing made or entered into by or on behalf of the Government and between issuance of the Preliminary Notification and issuance of the Final Notification. Also no Civil court can entertain any suit for the establishment of any right on any land included in the notification issued under Section 4.
12. Under Clause (d) of Section 5 of the Act, under which a proclamation is made by the Forest Settlement Officer a minimum period of three months from the date of publishing the proclamation is given to any person claiming any right or making any claim referred to under Section 4 by producing all documents in support thereof. If such a claim is made, the Forest Settlement Officer shall enquire into the claim by looking into the records by the Government and the evidence of any person acquainted with the same and also hear the concerned Forest Officer as regards any objections under Section 7.
- 36 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
13. Section 8 grants certain powers to the Forest Settlement Officer for the purpose of conducting the enquiry. If no claim is made within the period fixed under Section 5 before the Forest Officer, any rights in that regard shall be extinguished unless before the final notification under Section 17 is published, the person claiming them satisfies the Forest Settlement Officer that he had sufficient cause for not preferring such a claim within the period fixed under Section 5 in which case the Forest Settlement Officer would have to proceed to dispose of the claim.
14. Section 10 deals with the manner in which claims relating to shifting cultivation would have to be dealt with. Section 11 enables the Forest Settlement Officer to acquire land over which a right is claimed in case such land is not excluded from the limits of the reserved forest or no agreement with the owner for the surrender of his rights is arrived at. In the event of an acquisition, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would apply and the Forest Settlement Officer would act as a Deputy Commissioner. With regard to the right of way to pasturage or other forest produce or water, the Forest Settlement Officer has to consider any such claims and pass an order under Section 12 r/w Section 13 and 14. If no settlement under Section 14 is arrived at, then
- 37 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 compensation has to be determined on the basis of the value of the right claimed on the date of the preliminary notification in accordance with the provisions of the Act, insofar as such provisions are applicable under Section 15 of the Act.
15. Section 16 provides for an appeal against an order passed under Section 11, 12, 14 or 15. The statutory period for filing of an appeal is three months from the date of the order made by the Forest Settlement Officer. Section 17 states that when the period fixed under Section 5 for preferring a claim has lapsed and all claims have been disposed of under Section 9 and the period of limitation for filing an appeal under Section 16 has lapsed and appeals if any filed have been disposed of and all proceedings under Section 11 and 14 have been taken, the State Government shall publish a final notification specifying clearly the boundary marks to constitute a reserved forest and declare the same to be a reserved forest from the date fixed by a notification subject to the exercise of rights if any specified in such a notification. From the date so fixed, such forest shall be deemed to be a reserved forest. Before the date fixed in the notification under Section 18, the same shall be published in the Official Gazette and at the Taluk Head
- 38 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 Quarters in which the forest is situated and in the neighbourhood as a proclamation is published under Section 5.
16. Under Section 19, the State Government has the power to revise any arrangement made under Section 14 by modifying any order made under the said section and substitute the same by awarding compensation under Section 15. But the same has to be done within five years from the publication of any notification under Section 17.
17. On a reading of the aforesaid provision, it becomes clear that though no specific date has been fixed for the issuance of a declaration under Section 17 of the Act, nevertheless, after the issuance of the preliminary notification, only a minimum period of three months is granted to every person to make a claim. Also, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would have to be read into Section 11 of the Act in case, a necessity to acquire the land arises.
18. It is needless to observe that in many provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, specified time-frames have been mandated-from the declaration of the preliminary and final notification as well as for passing of an award. No doubt, an elaborate procedure has been contemplated between the issuance of a
- 39 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 preliminary notification and the issuance of a final notification under the Act encompassing the making of claims with regard to the notified areas proposed to be declared to be reserved forest and also settlement of the said claims, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are also contemplated and orders passed under Section 11, 12, 14 and 15 are also subject to appeal. However, we find that there is no specified period mentioned under the Act within which, the notification declaring the reserved forest has to be made once the preliminary notification has been issued.
19. When specific period has been fixed, for making a claim and also by filing an appeal by any persons, a corresponding time-frame for the adjudication of the claims and for issuance of a declaration ought to have been made. The absence of any specific time frame for the issuance of a declaration under Section 17 would imply that such a declaration must be made within a reasonable time. What is the reasonable time in the absence of any specific time frame mentioned in a statutory provision would vary from Act to Act and depending upon the object and scope of the Act. In the instant case, having regard to the object and scope of the Act in question, we are of the view that a period of three years would be the reasonable period within which, a declaration under Section 17 of the Act
- 40 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 ought to be made, excluding the period when steps are taken under the Land Acquisition Act 1894, as well as appellate proceedings, if any. This period obviously would exclude any stay orders granted by any Court of Law. But in the instant case, the State is unable to point out any steps initiated after the order passed by the Forest Settlement Officer, excluding 366.63 Acres, which according to the petitioner also includes the area of the subject quarry. This aspect is communicated to the petitioner in the year 2007, whereas in 2004 itself the quarry lease was granted to the petitioner.
20. In this context, reliance could be placed on the fact that originally in the matter of issuance of preliminary notification and a declaration under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, there was no time limit fixed for making an award. Subsequently, in the year 1984, an amendment was brought in the form of insertion to Section 11- A of the Land Acquisition Act. Infact, in the case of Ram Chand and Others v. Union of India and Others [(1994) 1 SCC 44], which is a decision on a dispute arising prior to the insertion of Section 4 to the Land Acquisition Act, the Supreme Court has held that compensation has to be paid within a reasonable time, even in the absence of any time limit prescribed under the Act and the reasonable
- 41 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 time was stated to be about two years in the said case.
21. In the instant case, though the preliminary notification is issued on 03/06/1991, the final notification is yet to be issued. Infact, several adjournments were given in the matter so as to enable the respondent - authorities to take a decision with regard to issuance of a declaration under Section 17 of the Act, even then, no steps have been taken to issue such a declaration. Therefore, we find that the State Government has by not taking steps for over two decades after the issuance of the preliminary notification, abandoned its intention to notify Sy.No.601/A1 as a Reserved Forest. This becomes all the more clear by the fact that subsequent to the issuance of the preliminary notification in the year 1991 and quarrying lease has also been granted to the petitioner and possibly to the other similarly placed persons in the year 2004. Therefore, the impugned order at Annexure "A" is without authority of law.
22. The preliminary notification dated 03/06/1991 is also quashed in so far as Sy.No.601/A1 is concerned, though in our view, the entire preliminary notification is inchoate. Annexure "A" and "B" are also quashed. The respondent - Authorities are directed to consider the petitioner's application for renewal of the quarrying lease for a
- 42 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 further period of ten years, excluding the period of lease when the petitioner was prevented from carrying on the quarrying activities during the subsistence of the Quarrying Deed No.105 since the year 2004.
23. The writ petition is accordingly, allowed. The renewal of the lease to be effected within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Parties to bear their respective costs."
7. It is also necessary to extract Section 64-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, which reads as under:
"64-A. Penalty for unauthorisedly taking possession of land constituted as reserved forest, district forest, village forest, protected forest and any other land under the control of the Forest Department.- (1) Any person unauthorisedly occupying any land in reserved forest, [district forest, village forest, protected forest and any other land under the control of the Forest Department may, without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against him under any other provision of this Act or any other law for the time being in force, be summarily evicted, by a Forest Officer not below the rank of an Assistant
- 43 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 Conservator of Forests and any crop including trees raised in the land and any building or other construction erected thereon shall, if not removed by him within such time as the Forest Officer may fix, be liable to forfeiture:
Provided that before evicting a person under this sub-section he shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
(2) Any property forfeited under sub-section (1) shall be disposed of in such manner as the Forest Officer may direct and the cost of removal of any crop, building or other work and of all works necessary to restore the land to its original condition shall be recoverable from the person evicted in the manner provided in section 109.
(3) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Forest Officer under sub-section (1) may, within such period and in such manner as may be prescribed, appeal against such order to the State Government or to such officer as may be authorised by the State Government in this behalf and the order of the Forest Officer shall, subject to the decision in such appeal, be final."
8. The aforesaid facts and circumstances including the statutory provisions referred to supra and the judgments of this Court will clearly indicate that in the instant case, the impugned
- 44 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021 order passed by the 6th respondent without providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner is contrary to the proviso to Section 64A of the Karnataka Forest Act and non-
holding of necessary enquiry or conducting joint inspection is also contrary to law and violative of principles of natural justice, warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.
9. Under these circumstances, the impugned order being completely unreasoned, non-speaking, cryptic and laconic order without assigning any reasons, without holding necessary enquiry or conducting spot joint inspection and without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner deserves to be quashed and the matter remitted back to the 6th respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.
10. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is hereby allowed.
ii) The impugned order at Annexure-G dated 15.12.2019 passed by the 6th respondent is hereby set aside.
- 45 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:9060 WP No. 201240 of 2021
iii) The matter is remitted back to the 6th respondent for reconsideration afresh bearing in mind the observations made in the present order as well as the judgments of the Co-ordinate Bench and the Division Bench of this Court in the cases of Laxmamma W/o Late Devaiah vs. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and Others (W.P. No.225710/2020 C/w W.P. No.225706/2020, D.D. 18.06.2020) and V.Sampangi Ramaiah vs. The Director/Commissioner, Department of Mines & Geology and Others (W.P. No.36792/2011, D.D. 11.12.2012) and after providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioners and hearing them in accordance with law.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE LG