Disposed¶47

Sri Shanmukha R M v. Chief Secretary to the Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Feb 2025WP/16463/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: forest rights; FRA 2006; Rule 12A(3); Section 6(6); Grama Sabha; Sub-Divisional Level Committee; District Level Committee; cancellation of grant order; natural justice; no opportunity of hearing; PIL pendency W.P.No.7719/2021; no interim order; writ of certiorari; Articles 226 and 227; High Court of Karnataka; Sagara Taluk; Shimoga; Malandur Village; 8 acres 22 guntas; Shanmukha R.M.; Jyoti Mulimani J.

What did the court decide?

Writ of certiorari issued quashing the order dated 09.08.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner cum District Level Committee (Annexure AD) cancelling the petitioner's forest rights grant; Government left free to act in accordance with law if it has any grievance; writ petition disposed of. ¶47

Sri Shanmukha R M Vs Chief Secretary to the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the cancellation order dated 09.08.2021 (Annexure AD) is bad in law as it was passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, contrary to the principles of natural justice. +2 more

¶42

Court's answer

The petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing; hence the cancellation order dated 09.08.2021 is opposed to the principles of natural justice and bad in law.

¶45

Ratio / Principle

Since the grant order is questioned before this Court and the question of the grant of forest rights is pending adjudication in (PIL) W.P.No.7719/2021, and there is no interim order or direction in the PIL, the Government could not have proceeded with the matter either by forming a committee or passing an order for cancellation of the petitioner's forest rights.

¶42

Key takeaways

The respondents did not adhere to Rule 12A(3) of the Act; hence the cancellation of the grant order dated 09.08.2021 is bad in law and the Court deems it proper to quash it.ratio¶46
Writ of certiorari is ordered: the order dated 09.08.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner cum District Level Committee (Annexure AD) is quashed; if the Government has any grievance, it may act in accordance with the law.ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Forest rights - grant under the Scheduled Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 - cancellation by District Level Committee without hearing - certiorari. The petitioner's family claimed possession and cultivation of lands in Sy.No.155 (8 acres) and Sy.No.157 (10 guntas), Malandur Village, Sagara Taluk for generations; after the FRA 2006 came into force the Grama Sabha held an enquiry, a spot mahazar dated 19.11.2014 was drawn, and by grant order dated 20.10.2015 the District Level Committee granted forest rights over 8 acres 22 guntas to the petitioner. One A.G.Yogendra challenged the grant in PIL W.P.No.7719/2021 (pending, no interim order). Thereafter respondents 3, 7 and 8 constituted themselves as a District Level Committee, noticed the petitioner on 23.06.2021, and on 09.08.2021 the District Level Committee cancelled the grant (Annexure AD). Held (Jyoti Mulimani, J.): (i) with the grant under adjudication in the PIL and no interim order therein, the Government could not have formed a committee or passed a cancellation order; (ii) the petitioner was given no opportunity of hearing, so the cancellation offended natural justice and was bad in law; (iii) the respondents did not adhere to Rule 12A(3). Writ of certiorari ordered; the order dated 09.08.2021 (Annexure AD) quashed; the Government may act in accordance with law if aggrieved; writ petition disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 16463 OF 2021 (GM-FOR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SHANMUKHA.R.M. AGED 43 YEARS, S/O MANJAPPA GOWDA, R/AT THIPPANAJADDU, MALANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, SAGARA TALUK, SHIMOGA DIST-577 401.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRPERSON, DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE, (CONSTITUTED UNDER RULER 7 OF THE SCHEDULE TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS, (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS), RULES, 2007, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 401.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶18

DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (CONSTITUTED UNDER RULER 7 OF THE SCHEDULE TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS), (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS) RULES, 2007), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶19

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRPERSON, SUB-DIVISIONAL LEVEL COMMITTEE, (CONSTITUTED UNDER RULER 5 OF THE SCHEDULE TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS, (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS) RULES, 2007) SAGARA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 401.

¶20

SUB-DIVISIONAL LEVEL COMMITTEE, (CONSTITUTED UNDER RULER 5 OF THE SCHDULE TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS, (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS), RULES, 2007, SAGARA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 401. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶21

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE, PRUTHIVI MANSION, 100 FEET ROAD, VINOB NAGAR, SHIMOGGA-577 201.

¶22

DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, SAGARA SUB-DIVISON, SAGARA, SHIMOGA-577 401.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA FOR R1 TO 8)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Sri.P.P.Hegde., Senior counsel on behalf of Sri.Venkatesh Somareddi., for the petitioner and Sri.Mahantesh Shettar., AGA for the respondents have appeared in person.

¶29

2. The brief facts are these:

¶30

It is stated that the family of the Petitioner has been residing in the lands mentioned in Sy. No.155 of Malandur Village, Adur Minor Forest, Sagara Taluk since approximately more than 500 years. It is said that the ancestors of the petitioner's have developed the above said lands since more than 500 years. It is also said that the ancestors of the petitioner constructed a temple along with a big pool around 400 years ago in the vicinity of the said lands and the family members of the petitioner have been looking after the affairs of the said temple ever since. The ancestors of the petitioner have been in possession of the said land and they have developed the said land. After coming into force of the Scheduled Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶33

Rights) Act, 2006, the Petitioner had filed an application before the Grama Sabha seeking granting of forest rights of the said land to an extent of 8 Acres in Sy.No.155 of Malandur Village, Sagara Taluk and 10 guntas in Sy.No.157 of Malandur Village, Sagara Taluk. The enquiry was conducted by the Grama Sabha and a spot mahazar dated 19.11.2014 was also conducted by taking statements of the elders in and around the area of the said land. The mahazar was forwarded and approved by both Sub-Divisional Level Committee and District Level Committee and as per grant order dated 20.10.2015, the forest rights of the said land to an extent of 8 Acres and 22 Guntas was granted to the Petitioner by the District Level Committee. It is stated that absolutely there is no illegality whatsoever in granting the forest rights of said land to the Petitioner.

¶34

As the matter stood thus, one A.G.Yogendra challenged the said grant order through a Public Interest Litigation in W.P No.7719/2021 and the same is pending. The Petitioner after the service of notice in the said case (PIL), has appeared through his counsel. It is stated that there is no interim order or any other direction in the said case. However, on 23.06.2021 respondents 3, 7 and 8 constituted themselves as District Level

¶35

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶37

Committee and issued notice to the petitioner alleging illegalities in the grant order and sought reply from the petitioner. The Petitioner submitted his reply dated 03.07.2021 stating that he will defend the PIL. On 01.07.2021, Respondent No.2 - Social Welfare Department wrote letter to the District Social welfare Department of Shimogga stating that the order of grant passed by the District Level Committee under Section 6(6) of the Act is final and binding and further opined that to consider the same, fresh Grama Sabha has to be set up. However, on 28.07.2021, the Respondent No.6 - Sub-Divisional Level Committee meeting was conducted by Respondent No.5 and others and in the said proceedings it is stated that the grant in favour of Petitioner is not in accordance with the law and hence submitted the file to the District Level Committee - Respondent No.4. It is contended that there was no notice whatsoever was given to the Petitioner prior to the meeting and copy was never furnished before holding any meeting by Respondent No.6 - Sub-Divisional Committee. Thereafter, the District Level Committee comprising Respondents 3, 7 and 8 have conducted the meeting on 09.08.2021 and in the said meeting the impugned order dated 09.08.2021 came to passed

¶38

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶40

by the District Level Committee - Respondent No.4 cancelling the grant of forest rights issued in favour of the Petitioner vide Annexure 'AD'. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶41

Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.

¶42

The facts are sufficiently stated and they do not require reiteration. The petitioner contends that by way of grant order, forest rights were grant to him in the year 2015. However, the same has been cancelled vide order dated:09.08.2021 without hearing him. The principal ground on which this Court is asked to quash Annexure-AD i.e., the cancellation order is opposed to the principles of natural justice. It is pivotal to note that the grant order is questioned before this Court and the question of the grant of forest rights of the petitioner is pending adjudication in (PIL) W.P.No.7719/2021. Moreover, there is no interim order or direction in the PIL. Hence, the Government could not have proceeded with the matter either by forming a committee or passing an order for cancellation of petitioner's forest rights. Furthermore, the petitioner was not given an opportunity and hence, the

¶43

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC:6578 WP No. 16463 of 2021

¶45

cancellation order is opposed to the principles of natural justice and bad in law.

¶46

The provisions of the Scheduled Tribes & Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 is a Central Act, it prescribes certain procedures for the recognition/ grant of the forest rights. However, the respondents have not adhere to Rule 12A (3) of the Act. Hence, the cancellation of grant order dated:09.08.2021 is bad in law. Therefore, this Court deems it proper to quash the same.

¶47

The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated:09.08.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner Cum District Level Committee - the third respondent vide AnnexureAD is quashed. If at all the Government has any grievance, they may act in accordance with the law.

¶48

Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of .

¶49

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶50

MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 41.1

Sri Shanmukha R M v. Chief Secretary to the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Shanmukha R M v. Chief Secretary to the Government of Karnataka

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

Sri Thomas Jacob Vs Sri M Ramaiah

Smt Pushpalatha @ Ankitha Kavya Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Waquar Ali H M Vs Smt K v Bindu

Smt M Saraswathi G Poojary Ganesh Vs Chief Regional Manager

M/S. Kudgi Transmission Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Manjappa Gowda Vs Chief Secretary to the Government of Karnataka