Disposed

Balu Garda Barela and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Bombay HC12 Jul 2023WP/7504/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed authorities to consider pending forest rights proposals under the 2006 Act following due process. It restrained coercive action against petitioners for 120 days if initiated without legal compliance, ensuring adherence to the Act's hearing provisions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider pending forest rights proposals under 2006 Act within 120 days; restraint on coercive action for 120 days if due process not followed.

Balu Garda Barela and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

909 wp 7504.23

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

909 WRIT PETITION NO.7504 OF 2023

¶5

BALU GARDA BARELA AND OTHERS
VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Narwadkar Mrigesh D.
AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya

¶8

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

¶9

Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE :12th July, 2023

¶10

P.C. :-

¶11

1.The Petitioners have put-forth prayer clause-B, C & D as under:

¶12

“B. By appropriate Writ, order or direction, the Respondents be directed to accept the fresh Forest Rights Claims of the petitioners as per Scheduled Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and Rules thereof. Furthermore the respondents be directed not to dispossess/evict the petitioners from the Forest Land which they are occupying since generations.

¶13

C. By appropriate Writ, order or direction the Respondents be directed to verify the claims of the petitioners as per Rule 12 and Rule 12-A of the Scheduled Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2007.

¶14

D. Pending hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition the Respondent Authorities may kindly be restrained from taking any coercive action against the Petitioners.”

¶15

( 2 ) 909 wp 7504.23

¶16

2. The Petitioners contend that in view of the Government
Resolutions dated 27.12.1978, 11.11.2016 and 28.11.2022, with regard to
regularization of encroachment made on Government waste lands, Gairan
lands and forest lands, action in the nature of removal of the encroachment
made by these Petitioners, cannot be resorted to. Reliance is placed upon
Section 4 and 5 of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers:
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and it is contended that the proposals
pending under this Act with the District Collector, Jalgaon with regard to all
these Petitioners, needs to be considered in the light of the 2006 Act.

¶17

3.Let the competent authorities consider the pending proposals of
the petitioners by following the due procedure laid down in Law and in terms
of the Government Resolutions applicable and the provisions of the 2006 Act. If
the Act provides for a personal hearing to these petitioners at a particular stage
in the matter, the said provisions shall be scrupulously followed. Let this
exercise be completed within a period of 120 days from today. Taking into
account the provisions of the 2006 Act, we are protecting the Petitioners
against coercive action, for a period of 120 days, only against action initiated
without following the due process of Law.

¶18

4.In view of the above, this petition is disposed off.

¶19

 [Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.]

¶20

[RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.]

¶21

mub

Balu Garda Barela and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balu Garda Barela and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Purushottam Dixit Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Subhash Jalagaud Punnamwar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Shriram Shankar Taware Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Rajesh Premsing Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector and Another

Hamal Mapadi Kamgar Sanghatana Thr Its Secretary Dushen Hemant Bagul Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dhondiram Bhikaji Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others