Dismissed

Rabindra Pradhan v. State of Odisha Representated by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

NGT6 May 2025Review Application No. 3/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal dismissed a review application filed by the Sarpanch of Jhadapada Gram Panchayat. The original case directed demolition of an illegal Gram Panchayat Office on Plot No.1793 because no Forest Rights Act or Forest Conservation Act permission existed for that specific plot, unlike the permitted Plot No.1795.

What did the court decide?

The review application was dismissed; the order upholding the direction to demolish the illegal structure on Plot No.1793 stands.

Rabindra Pradhan vs State of Odisha Representated by… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

(in-Chamber)

¶2

Item No.12

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA

¶4

Review Application No.03/2025/EZ

¶5

¶6

Original Application No.114/2024/EZ

¶7

IN THE MATTER OF:

¶8

Rabindra Pradhan, Aged about 50 years, S/o Biswanath Pradhan, At/Po – Jhadapada, PS – Chandapur, Dist. – Nayagarh, Odisha

¶9

…. Applicant(s)

¶10

Versus

¶11

1. State of Odisha,

¶12

Represented by Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha, Lokseva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar, Odisha;

¶13

2. Additional Chief Secretary,

¶14

Forest, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha, Kharvel Bhawan, Bhubaneswar,

¶15

Odisha – 751001;

¶16

3. Principal Secretary,

¶17

Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Government of Odisha, Secretariat Building, Bhubaneswar, Odisha – 751001;

¶18

4. Collector & District Magistrate,

¶19

Nayagarh, At/Po - Nayagarh, Odisha – 752069;

¶20

5. Superintendent of Police, Nayagarh, At/Po - Nayagarh, Odisha – 752069;

¶21

¶22

6. Divisional Forest Officer, Khurdha, At/Po/Dist – Khordha,

¶23

Odisha – 752055;

¶24

7. Member Secretary,

¶25

Odisha Pollution Control Board, A-118, Unit – VII, Nilakantha Nagar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha – 751012;

¶26

8. Tahasildar, Ranpur,

¶27

At/Po - Ranpur, Dist - Nayagarh, Odisha – 752026;

¶28

9. Secretary,

¶29

Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change, Govt. of India, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jorbagh, New Delhi – 110003;

¶30

10. Jhadapada Gram Panchayat,

¶31

Represented through its Panchayat Executive Officer (PEO), Village/Po – Jhadapada, P.S. - Chandpur, Dist - Nayagarh, Odisha – 752025;

¶32

11. Souribandhu Sahoo,

¶33

Aged about 43 years, S/o Late Benudhar Sahoo, Sarpanch, Jhadapada Gram Panchayat, At - Jhadapada, PS – Chandapur, Dist. – Nayagarh, Odisha – 752025;

¶34

12. Nityananda Jena,

¶35

Aged about 66 years, S/o Late Baban Jena, At – Jhadapada (Balarampur Sahi), Po - Jhadapada, PS -Chandapur, Dist. – Nayagarh, Odisha – 752025

¶36

…. Respondent(s)

¶37

CORAM:

¶38

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER

¶39

¶40

ORDER

¶41

The Original Application No.114/2024/EZ was filed by the Applicant therein, alleging illegal cutting of trees and construction of building and occupation of forest land on Khata No.387, Plot No.1793, Area Ac.1.70 dec. in Jharapada Mouza under Ranapur Tahasil in the District of Nayagar, Odisha by the Jharapada Gram Panchayat, Respondent No.10, and by the Private Respondents, Respondent Nos.11 and 12.

¶42

The Tribunal in paragraph-15 of its judgment and order dated 04.02.2025 recorded a categorical finding that permission for construction was granted on the Plot No.1795 only, and not the Plot No.1793, and that too for construction of Community Centre and Fair Price Shop by the Divisional Forest Officer in exercise of powers under Section 3 (2) of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act, 2006’). The finding was also recorded that this permission was granted for diversion of 0.488 Ha. of forest land and no permission was granted for opening or operating Gram Panchayat Office over Plot No.l793. Accordingly, a direction was given by the Tribunal to the Collector & District Magistrate, Nayagarh, to demolish the illegal construction standing on the land in question i.e. Plot No.1793, Khata No.387 and to clear the land of all structures and debris. Paragraphs-15, 16 and 17 of the judgment and order of the Tribunal dated 04.02.2025 read as under:-

¶43

“15. From the Joint Inspection Report and affidavit of the Divisional Forest Officer, Khordha and the Collector & District Magistrate, Nayagarh, it is established that permission for

¶44

¶45

construction was granted in respect of Plot No.1795 only, and not Plot No.1793, for construction of Community Centre and Fair Price Shop by the Divisional Forest Officer in exercise of powers under Section 3 (2) of the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. This permission has been granted for diversion of 0.488 Ha. of forest land. No permission was granted for opening or operating Gram Panchayat Office over Plot No.1793. The facts are confirmed in the Joint Inspection Report prepared after site inspection by the fact-finding Committee Constituted by this Tribunal.

¶46

16. The Hon’ble High Court of Orissa by its order dated 30.07.2021 on a Writ Petition filed by the Jharapada Grama Panchayat, has dismissed the said Writ Petition observing that the land sought to be settled in favour of the petitioner i.e. Jharapada Grama Panchayat was recorded as Jungle in Sabik Settlement as per letter of the Chief Secretary No.4822/CS dated 12^th February, 2015 and any land recorded as Jungle in Sabik Settlement cannot be settled in favour of a person or institution without appropriate permission of under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

¶47

17. We, therefore, dispose of this Original Application with a direction to the Collector & District Magistrate, Nayagarh, to demolish the illegal structure standing on the land in question i.e. Plot No.1793, Khata No.387 and to clear the land of all structures and debris as may be standing thereon within a period of one month hereof and restore the land to its original forum.”

¶48

The Review Applicant who is the Sarpanch of Jhadapada Gram Panchayat has filed the present Review Application stating that since it is a new panchayat there is no alternative place existing for functioning of the Gram Panchayat Office. It is also stated that Gram Sabha was convened on 26.01.2023 and in the Resolution it was resolved to shift the said Panchayat Office to the

¶49

¶50

Nilakantheswar Library which is much prior to filing of the Original Application No.114/2024/EZ and that Rabindra Pradhan, the Applicant of the Original Application, is the signatory to the Gram Sabha Proceeding but the Review Applicant has failed to place the Resolution on record and, therefore, there was no occasion for the Tribunal to appreciate the facts in the light of the Gram Sabha Resolution and, therefore, the judgment and order dated 04.02.2025 be reviewed.

¶51

We have gone through the Review Application and we find that a clear finding has been recorded by the Tribunal that the permission for construction was granted by the Divisional Forest Officer, Khurdha, and the Collector & District Magistrate, Nayagarh, for construction in respect of Plot No.1795 only and not in Plot No.1793, and that too, for construction of Community Centre and Fair Price Shop only in exercise of powers under Section 3 (2) of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and this permission was also granted for diversion of 0.488 Ha. of forest land. It was categorically observed that no permission was granted for opening or operating Gram Panchayat Office over Plot No.1793.

¶52

The Tribunal while deciding the Original Application had also noted that the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa by its order dated 30.07.2021 passed in Writ Petition (C) No.20308 of 2021 ( Jharapada Grama Panchayat Vs. State of Odisha & Ors. ), filed by the Jharapada Grama Panchayat, had dismissed the said Writ Petition observing that the land sought to be settled in favour of the Jharapada Grama Panchayat was recorded as Jungle in Sabik Settlement as per letter of the Chief Secretary No.4822/CS dated 12^th February, 2015 and any land recorded as ‘Jungle’ in Sabik Settlement cannot

¶53

¶54

be settled in favour of a person or institution without appropriate permission under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

¶55

The categorical finding of the Tribunal while deciding the Original Application No.114/2024/EZ was that permission was granted for construction of Community Centre and Fair Price Shop in respect of Plot No.1795 only, and not of Plot No.1793 whereas the construction in question was made on Plot No.1793 and, therefore, even if there was a resolution of the Jharapada Grama Panchayat prior to filing of the Original Application and even if the Review Applicant/Applicant of the Original Application was a signatory to the resolution that would not validate a construction made over Plot No.1793 which is on the face of it illegal and in such circumstances no direction can be given by this Tribunal to the Respondents to explore the possibility of diversion of forest land under Forest Rights Act, 2006, or Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, for any plot other than Plot No.1795.

¶56

For reasons aforesaid, the Review Application is thoroughly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.

¶57

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶58

B. Amit Sthalekar, JM

¶59

……….................................... Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM

¶60

May 06, 2025, Review Application No.03/2025/EZ In Original Application No.114/2024/EZ MN

¶61

Rabindra Pradhan v. State of Odisha Representated by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabindra Pradhan v. State of Odisha Representated by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jallan Food Products vs Central Ground Water Board

Avadhesh Singh vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Dushyant Gupta Father Shri Narendra Gupta vs State of Mp Though Its Chief Secretary

1. Bishnupriya Mohanty D/O-Late Kelu Charan Mohanty Aged About 62 Years vs 1. State of Odisha Represented by through Additional Chief Secretary Forest and Environment Dept Govt. of Odisha

Farukh Chouhan vs State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority Uttar Pradesh

Saravanan vs the Tamilnadu Coastal Zone Management Authority

News Item Titled "Garbage Overflow Poses Health Risks to Visually Impaired Students in W Delhi" Appearing in the Millenium Post Dated 30.04.2024 vs

1. Rakesh Mohanty Aged About 26 Years S/O- Siba Prasad Mohanty vs 1. State of Odisha through Additional Chief Secretary Forest and Environment Climate Change Department Government of Odisha

Sumita Banerjee vs State of West Bengal

Baisakhi Bhowmik and Anr. vs the Member Secretary of West Bengal Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 14/2025 in Appeal No. 24/2022 of Satyanarayan Rao vs Union of India

Rajan Kumar vs State of Bihar

Raghunath Maity vs West Bengal Pollution Control Board

Ravindra Kumar vs State of Bihar