Nandlal Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capitol Complex, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶13

The Collector, Rajnandgaon Collectorate Campus, District Rajanandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶14

Divisional Forest Officer, Rajnandgaon Division (Forest), District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh.

¶15

Assistant Commissioner, Collectorate Campus, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶16

The Sub Divisional Officer, Rajnandgaon Division, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶17

Khileshwari Pisda, D/o Late Chandra Prakash Pisda, Village Gwalidih, Tehsil Churiya, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

¶18

Gram Panchayat Grwaladih, Through Sarpanch, Tehsil Churiya, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶19

... Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr. Kshitiz Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.1 to 5: Mr. R.K. Sahu, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.6 & 7 : None

¶21

2

¶22

SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Part Prateem Sahu

¶23

Order on Board

¶24

10/07/2026

¶25

Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

¶26

“10.1) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the respondents pertaining to the petitioner.

¶27

10.2) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs/order/direction, quashing the impugned letter/order dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure P- 7), since the same is arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶28

10.3) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs/order/direction, restraining the Respondent authorities from passing any order adversely affecting the ‘forest right’ of the petitioner as conferred to him under the Rule 8 (h) of the Rules, 2012.

¶29

10.3) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs/ order / direction, quashing the impugned letter/order dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure P- 7), since the same is arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction.

¶30

10.4) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs/ order / direction, restraining the respondents from interfering with the rights of the petitioner over the subject land.

¶31

10.5) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs/ order / direction, restraining the respondents from dispossessing the petitioner from the subject land.

¶32

3

¶33

10.6) Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may also be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.”

¶34

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is resident of village Gwalindih, Tehsil Chhuriya District Rajnandgaon and being a member of other traditional forest dweller in possession of land bearing Khasra No.103/1 area 1.375 hectare, after coming into force of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (henceforth ‘the Act of 2006’), had submitted an application before the Gram Panchayat Karmari for grant of forest rights as provided under the Act of 2006. Application was placed before the Gram Sabha and from where it was forwarded to the Sub-Division Level Committee and thereafter to District Level Committee headed by the Collector. Forest right was granted by the District Level Committee. Referring to the provision under sub-section (6) of Section 6 of the Act of 2006, it is argued that decision of the District Level Committee for the purpose of record of rights shall be final and binding. He submits that after issuance of certificate of forest rights, based on some complaint, respondent No.5-Sub-Divisional Officer has issued a memo to the forest authorities including Sarpanch / Secretary of the gram panchayat Karmari with the subject ‘for the purpose of cancelling the forest rights granted to petitioner herein’, to

¶35

4

¶36

make available proposal of the Village Level Committee and the Gram Panchayat. He contended that from the contents of Annexure P-7, which is the memo issued by respondent No.5SDO, it is apparent that SDO had initiated proceeding to cancel the forest rights granted to petitioner by the District Level Committee, which is without jurisdiction. He submits that when the provision under Section 6 (6) of the Act of 2006 provides that the order of the District Level Committee to be final, the authority below the Collector, like the SDO, who is authority within the Sub-Division Level Committee has no jurisdiction to examine the correctness of the forest rights granted by the District Level Committee and therefore, the proceeding initiated vide memo dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure P-7) be quashed.

¶37

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 to 5-State opposes submissions of learned counsel for petitioner and submits that respondent No.5-SDO has initiated the proceedings based on the complaint received. Memo was issued only to consider whether the petitioner is entitled to get the forest rights or not.

¶38

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available in record of writ petition.

¶39

Petitioner has placed on record application submitted for grant of forest rights, recommendation made by the Gram

¶40

5

¶41

Sabha, recommendation of the Sub-Division Level Committee and forest rights was granted in favour of petitioner by the District Level Committee headed by the Collector along with Divisional Forest Officer and the Commissioner, Tribal Development Department being members of the Committee.

¶42

Certificate of forest rights is issued under Rule 8 (h) of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2007 (for short ‘the Rules of 2007’). Section 6 of the Act of 2006 deals with the authorities to vest forest rights in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers and procedure thereof. Section 6 prescribes the procedure as to how the application is to be submitted and forwarded by the gram panchayat, Gram Sabha and thereafter to Sub-Division Level Committee and finality of forest rights has been given to the District Level Committee under sub-section (6) of Section 6 of the Act of 2006 which provides that decision of the District Level Committee on the record of forest rights shall be final and binding.

¶43

From the aforementioned provisions under the Act of 2006, it is apt clear that once the District Level Committee has granted forest rights then its decision is final and if, for any reason, a person is aggrieved in any manner, then a complaint can be made to the State Level Monitoring

¶44

6

¶45

Committee, which is constituted under Rule 9 of the Rules of 2007, headed by the Chief Secretary as Chairperson along with 09 other members. Respondent No.5-SDO is the Chairperson of the committee at sub-division level, which is below the District Level Committee under the hierarchy, then, in the opinion of this Court, respondent No.5 being the Chairperson of the Sub-Division Level Committee to process the claim regarding grant of forest rights, is having no jurisdiction to test the veracity and legality of the forest rights granted by the District Level Committee, more so, when under sub-section (6) of Section 6 of the Act of 2006 there is specific mention that forest rights granted by the District Level Committee shall be final and binding.

¶46

For the foregoing reasons, in the opinion of this Court, the memo dated 15.11.2021, Annexure P-7, issued under the signature of respondent No.5-SDO is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Memo dated 15.11.2021, Annexure P-7, is hereby quashed. However, if respondent No.6 is having any grievance with regard to grant of forest rights to petitioner, she will be at liberty to file appropriate proceeding before appropriate authority in accordance with law.

¶47

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶48

roshan/-

Nandlal Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandlal Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Lal Shrivastav Vs Mohd. Imran Khan

Hem Singh Dhruv Vs Mohd. Imran Khan

Shafique Mohd. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Arki Sahakari Vipanan Samiti Mariyadit Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Naina Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rohit Sidar Vs State of Chhattisgarh