Disposed

Varghese Tv v. Divisional Forest Officer

Kerala HC11 Mar 2019WP(C)/3952/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged disturbance of possession in land claimed to be private property. Respondents alleged it was vested forest. Court held this requires a competent Tribunal. Petitioner directed to approach Forest Tribunal within three months with status quo maintained.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner relegated to the Forest Tribunal to move within three months; status quo maintained for three months.

Varghese Tv Vs Divisional Forest Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 3952 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

VARGHESE TV S/O.LATE VARGHESE, THACHEERICKAL HOUSE, KOLUMBU, POKKAMADA, ELAVANCHERRY POST, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, ALSO HAVING THE ADDRESS THACHEERIKKAL HOUSE, PATHIRIKKODE POST, MELATTUR VIA, EDAPOTTA VILLAGE, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY SRI.LIJU. M.P

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER NENMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 501

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD-678 001.

¶12

3 THE TAHSILDAR, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 101.

¶13

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER ELAVANCHERRY VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRIC-678 508.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.SANDESH RAJA.K., SPL. G.P. (FOREST)

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 3952 of 2019

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner claims that he is the owner and in possession of 1.5 acres in Survey No.260 pt which is comprised in the Resurvey No.321/8 of Elavancherry Village. The petitioner claims title based on a purchase certificate having No.82/1989 issued by the Land Tribunal, Kollengode. Ext.P2 is the land tax receipt. The petitioner also produced possession certificate. He approached this Court claiming that possession has been disturbed at the instance of the Forest Department.

¶20

In the statement filed by the 1^st respondent- Divisional Forest Officer, it is stated that this land is a part of the vested forest. It is further stated that survey sketch was approved by the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Forest Survey, Perinthalmanna as early as in the year 1979. The Forest Department also have a case that the land on which the petitioner is claiming title based on the purchase certificate is the land having no relation with the forest land

¶21

WP(C).No. 3952 of 2019

¶22

¶23

and it is a totally different land.

¶24

3.The disputed question regarding the possession and title can be only resolved by a competent Tribunal. The question is whether this is forming part of a vested forest or not.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that if a joint verification is conducted, that would reveal it is not a part of vested forest. It may be true that if such a verification is done, location of the property can be found out. But that can be done only through the process of the Tribunal. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner can be relegated to the Forest Tribunal. The petitioner shall move the Forest Tribunal within a period of three months. For a period of three months, status quo shall be maintained. If the petitioner wants any further relief, he is at liberty to seek before the Tribunal.

¶26

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

SAS/11/03/2019

Sd/-

//TRUE COPY//

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

P.A TO JUDGE

¶33

WP(C).No. 3952 of 2019

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX

¶36

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶37

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY CARRYING N TRIBUNAL,	OF THE O.82/19 KOLLENG	PURCHASE CERTIFICATE 89 ISSUED BY THE LAND ODE.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY NAME OF CH	OF THE AMI ON	TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN THE 17/04/2008.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY FAVOUR OF	OF THE THE PET	WILL EXECUTED BY CHAMI IN ITIONER
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY LATE CHAMI	OF THE .	DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY DATED 11/0 OFFICE IN	OF THE 5/2012 FAVOUR	POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY 26/11/2015 PETITIONER	OF THE ISSUED .	TAX RECEIPT DATED IN THE NAME OF THE
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY ISSUED BY	OF THE THE PAN	BUILDING TAX RECEIPT CHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P8 A	TRUE COPY 17/09/2018 PETITIONER	OF THE ISSUED .	ELECTRICITY BILL DATED IN THE NAME OF THE
EXHIBIT P8 B	TRUE COPY 12/11/2018 PETITIONER	OF THE ISSUED .	ELECTRICITY BILL DATED IN THE NAME OF THE
EXHIBIT P8 C	TRUE COPY 18/09/2017 PETITIONER	OF THE ISSUED .	ELECTRICITY BILL DATED IN THE NAME OF THE
EXHIBIT P8 D	TRUE COPY 18/07/2018 PETITIONER	OF THE ISSUED .	ELECTRICITY BILL DATED IN THE NAME OF THE
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY RESIDENCE THE PETITI	OF THE AND AGR ONER.	PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ICULTURAL OPERATIONS OF
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE PHOTO THE PROPER	GRAPHS TY OF T	SHOWING THE CAIRNS PUT IN HE PETITIONER.

¶38

WP(C).No. 3952 of 2019

¶39

¶40

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:-

¶41

ANNEXURE R1A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.12.2018 ANNEXURE R1B TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE EXTENT OF ECROACHMENT FOUND IN THE ELAVANCHERRY AREA ALONG VFC ITEM NO.35 (VENGUNADU KOVILAKOM MALAVARAM) BOUNDARY AND THE BOUNDARY CONSOLIDATION WORK DONE IN THE MONTHS OF DECEMBER 2018 AND JANUARY 2019

Varghese Tv v. Divisional Forest Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varghese Tv v. Divisional Forest Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaison Pius, Vs Jojy.P.Jose

Bethel Plantations Pvt. Ltd. Vs Provident Fund Commissioner

M/S. First Steps Baby Wear Pvt.Ltd. Vs Assistant State Tax Officer

P.Ramachandran, Vs Union of India (Uoi)

M/S.Elavally Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the State Tax Officer

Jinesh, Vs the Tahasildar