Disposed

Kantilal Upadhyay & Anrs. v. State of Rajasthan

NGT8 May 2026Original Application No. 172/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Applicants challenged illegal construction on forest land in Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary. The Tribunal relied on a committee report and a High Court order confirming encroachment removal. It held the matter disposed of by the High Court under Section 34A and expressed no need for further action.

What did the court decide?

The Original Application 172/2025(CZ) stands disposed of with no further action required by the Tribunal.

Kantilal Upadhyay & Anrs. vs State of Rajasthan — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.27

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)

¶3

Original Application No.172/2025(CZ) (Earlier O.A. No.607/2025-PB)

¶4

Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Applicant(s) Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Respondent(s) Date of Hearing: 08.05.2026

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE MR. SUDHIR KUMAR CHATURVEDI, EXPERT MEMBER

¶6

For Applicant (s): None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv. for R-1 & 3 & R-5(RSPCB) Mr. Vaibhav Thakuria, Adv. (SEIAA) Mr. Ayush Choubey, Adv. with Mr. Saket Sharma, Adv. for R-6 ORDER

¶7

1. Mr. Kantilal Upadhyay and Mr. Iqbal Mohamad have sent the present letter petition dated 30.07.2025 by post to this Tribunal which has been treated and registered as O.A. No. 607/2025 in exercise of suo moto jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha, (2022) 13 SCC 401.

¶8

The Applicants have raised grievances that despite the ban on any new construction by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in village Danav Patwar Halka Manpur Tehsil due to declaration of Abu Road District Sirohi Rajasthan as buffer zone/eco sensitive zone, the Brahma Kumari Sansthan Danava (Shantivan), with the connivance and corrupt practices of the officials of the local Revenue Department/Forest Department/Town Improvement Trust Abu, has illegally constructed 1

¶9

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶10

hundreds of multi-storey buildings on the forest department land and illegally occupied the Forest Department cave by constructing illegal labour quarters/roads/illegal multi-storey buildings on the forest department land near Anand Sarovar, destroying the original form of the drain by constructing illegal buildings on the forest department drain land and currently illegally constructed grand illegal multi-storey buildings, roads and quarters on about 15-20 bigha forest department land near Anand Sarovar.

¶11

A Committee was constituted consisting Collector and representative of the State Pollution Control Board, Rajasthan and directed to examine the matter and submit the report.

¶12

Members of the Committee visited the site and submitted the report as follows: -

¶13

Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary is situated in Sirohi district of Rajasthan close to the borders of Gujarat, between 24° 33' to 24° 43′ N and 72° 38' to 72°53' E in the Southern part of the Aravali Mountain Range. It was declared as Wildlife Sanctuary in 1960 which was further modified and finally notified in year the 2008. The Eco Sensitive Zone of Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary was declared on 11.11.2020.

¶14

A complaint was addressed to Forest department, regarding encroachment of the Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary by the Brahmakumari organization and constructing multistoried buildings namely in Manmohinivan and Anand Sarovar premises. Brahmakumari Sansthan filed various petitions in the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan numbered as 3855/2017, 4256/ 2017, 679/2018, 18654/2018, 18569/2018, 1717/2018, 43/2019. Through the order dated 23.05.2022, Hon'ble High Court disposed all the applications and vacated the stay order dated 18.02.2019. In compliance of the order, Regional Forest Officer, Abu Taleti demolished the encroachment structures made in

¶15

¶16

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶17

khasra no. 412, 416 and 419 and sealed the 72 rooms of 6 storied building on 26.05.2022.

¶18

The same case was decided by the Hon'ble NGT on 07.08.2020 (Annexure- 5) and Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan on 23.05.2022.

¶19

The similar case D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4523/2026 has also been filed in the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan.

¶20

Point wise factual observations of the committee Point No.1

¶21

The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Central Government notified an area to an extent of 0.1 kilometres to 6.08 kilometres around the boundary of Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary, in the Sirohi district in the State of Rajasthan as Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary Ecosensitive Zone vide gazette notification dated 11.11.2020.

¶22

Point No. 2, 3, 4 and 5

¶23

Prajapita Brahma Kumari Eswariya Viswa Vidyalaya organization has its institutional setup along with the headquarter in Mount Abu and the areas near to the Mount Abu. A complaint was addressed to Forest Department, regarding encroachment of the Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary by the organization and constructing multistoried buildings. The DCF Wildlife, Mount Abu, through District Collector & Magistrate, got a joint survey team constituted on 13.09.2017(Annexure-7) and surveyed the areas and submitted report to the Tehsildar Aburoad that a total of 5 bigha of forest land of Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary was encroached in block 1, gram Abu No. 2. Taking cognizance of the report, forest range officer, Abu Taleti filed an FIR 2964/35 dated 18.10.2017 u/s 34 (A) of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 against Brahma Kumari security general, WRST managing trustee, Shantivan, Aburoad and Manager, Brahmakumari Sansthan.

¶24

DCF, Wildlife Mount Abu, vide letter 2230 dated 23.10.2017 made ACF as investigating officer and ordered to furnish report. ACF, Mount Abu issued notices to Brahma Kumari Security General, Manger, Brahmakumari

¶25

¶26

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶27

Sanstha and Shri Shashi Kant S/O Gangaram. Based on the report on investigating officer, DCF Wildlife, Mount Abu decided the case on 26.12.2017 (Annexure-9) u/s 34 (A) of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and issued speaking order for the eviction of the land and demolish the permanent structures on 4 bigha 10 biswa land of block Abu No.1 gram 2 in khasra no. 412 and 416 in addition to 10 biswa land in khasra no. 419.

¶28

Brahmakumari Sansthan filed various petitions in the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan numbered as 3855/2017, 4256/ 2017, 679/2018, 18654/2018, 18569/2018, 1717/2018, 43/2019. Through the order dated 23.05.2022, Hon'ble High Court disposed all the applications and vacated the stay order dated 18.02.2019. In compliance of the order, Regional Forest Officer, Abu Taleti demolished the encroachment structures made in khasra no. 412, 416 and 419 and sealed the 72 rooms of 6 storied building on 26.05.2022.

¶29

Point No. 6 and 7

¶30

The Brahmakumari Organization accepted that some part of the building in the Manmohinivan campus falls in the encroached reserved forest land of the Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary and applied under the provisions of the Forest Protection Act 1980 for diversion of forest land of the sanctuary for non-forestry purposes on 25.05.2018. Wildlife clearance for diversion of no. FP/RJ/Others/2525 dated 24/5/2018 for existing building Manmohan and proposal no. FP/RJ. Others/2527/2018 dated 25/05/2018 for diversion of 1 ha land for the existing building Anand Sarovar were forwarded for rejection to higher level by DCF Wildlife, Mount Abu on 08.02.2019.

¶31

The Brahmakumari Organization again sent the proposals for diversion vide proposal nos. WL/RJ/Others/401536/2022 and FP/RJ/Others/400663/2022. In above mentioned proposals proposal no. WL/RJ/Others/401536/2022 is pending at Govt. level for competent approval.

¶32

Point No. 8

¶33

¶34

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶35

Anand Sarovar is a residential premises of Brahmakumari Sansthan and as per revenue records there is no recorded water body on the said land.

¶36

Point No. 9

¶37

Hon'ble NGT has decided the Original Application No. 1051/2018, Residents of village Danvav v/s State of Rajasthan on 07.08.2020.

¶38

Point No. 10

¶39

To demonstrate the tentative boundaries of Eco Sensitive Zone (Outer Core), kal (keyhole markup language) file is prepared, which has been uploaded on the departmental website. The kml file is used as a reference only and it cannot be produced for legal documentation. To verify the forest land on site, physical verification is required by the department.

¶40

The perusal of the report reveals that various matters were pending before the Hon’ble High Court, which has been disposed of and proceedings have been initiated by the Assistant Conservator of Forest and District Administration/Forest Department demolished the encroachment’s structure made in the forest area and taken position of the same.

¶41

The application by the Respondent for diversion of the forest land is another matter, which is to be decided by the competent authority. The similar issue was raised in OA No.1051/2018 and Principal Bench of this Tribunal vide Order dated 07.08.2020 disposed of the application in light of the order of the Hon’ble High Court of India.

¶42

Further that Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in S.B. (C)WP No.43 of 2019 vide order dated 23.05.2022 observed as follows: -

¶43

6. A perusal of the notice dated 18.10.2017 (Annex.5) at the first flush gives an impression that an offence under the provisions flush gives a of the Act of 1972 is being investigated. But a careful reading thereof, reveals that the proceedings, which are

¶44

¶45

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶46

being undertaken by the Forest Department are that of removal of encroachment, as per Section 34A of the Act of 1972.

¶47

7. Section 34A of the Act of 1972 is reproduced hereinunder: "34A. Power to remove Encroachment

¶48

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any officer not below the rank of an Assistant Conservator of Forests may,

¶49

(a) evict any person from a sanctuary or National Park, who unauthorizedly occupies Government land in contravention of the provisions of this Act;

¶50

(b) remove any unauthorized structures, or constructions erected on buildings, any Government land within any sanctuary or National Park and all the things, tools and effects belonging to such person shall be confiscated, by an order of an officer not below the rank of the Deputy Conservator of Forests: Provided that no such order shall be passed unless the affected person is given an opportunity of being heard.

¶51

(2) The provisions of this section shall apply notwithstanding any other penalty which may be inflicted for violation of any other provision of this Act."

¶52

8. A perusal of the above quoted provision and impugned notice dated 18.10.2017, leaves no room for ambiguity that the proceedings being undertaken by the Respondents are that of removal of encroachment. Section 34A does not envisage any punishment or fine; it does not have any traces of offence or trappings of criminal nature. The culmination of the proceedings under Section 34A of the Act of 1972 would entail removal of encroachment on forest land but it would not attract any fine or punishment/ imprisonment. Such being the position, the criminal writ petition invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable.

¶53

¶54

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶55

9.That apart, the petitioners have already filed two writ petitions being SBCWP Nos.18564/2018 and 18569/2018, challenging the very same order dated 26.12.2017, which is impugned in the petition in hands. Both the petitions have been withdrawn by the petitioners.

¶56

10. In view of what has been noted above, this Court finds itself to be ceased of the jurisdiction to entertain present petition and pronounce upon the grounds raised herein. Besides this, there is hardly any reason to interfere, as the petitioners themselves have come with a specific case that the land in question, on which they have raised construction, is a part of the forest land.

¶57

11. The petition is dismissed and interim order passed by this Court on 18.02.2019 is vacated.

¶58

In view of the para 10 the matter is very much clear and the petitioner has himself admitted that construction is, in the part of the forest land and later on the unlawful encroachments have been removed.

¶59

A case was registered under Section 34A of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and after during investigation the matter was disposed of and action has been taken.

¶60

Learned counsel for the State Pollution Control Board Advocate Rohit Sharma has submitted that the Committee has submitted the report to the Collector and Collector has submitted the report to this Tribunal, which has been quoted above.

¶61

Learned counsel for respondent No.6, Mr. Saket Sharma has submitted that the matter has been finally disposed of by the order of Hon’ble High Court. And further submitted that the encroachments have been removed.

¶62

The law as quoted in the judgement of the Hon’ble High Court clearly depicts that the competent authority of the Forest Department has ample power to remove the encroachments under Section 34A of the

¶63

¶64

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶65

Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. In case of any further encroachments the

¶66

competent authority may take necessary actions as per rules.

¶67

Since at present the matter has been disposed of by the Hon’ble High Court and the encroachments have been removed, thus no further action is required by this Tribunal. However, the Forest Department shall remain vigilant to exercise the power under Section 34A of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and take necessary action accordingly.

¶68

With these observations the Original Application 172/2025(CZ) stands disposed of.

¶69

Sheo Kumar Singh, JM

¶70

Sudhir Kumar Chaturvedi, EM

¶71

08^th May, 2026, Original Application No.172/2025(CZ) (Earlier O.A. No.607/2025-PB) AR

¶72

¶73

O.A. No.172/2025(CZ) Kantilal Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Kantilal Upadhyay & Anrs. v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kantilal Upadhyay & Anrs. v. State of Rajasthan

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

Subhash Chandrawanshi vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Gajendra Singh Rajpoot vs Union of India Ministry of Enviornment Forest & Climate Change through Regional Director

Smt Preeti Maitra vs West Bengal Pollution Control Borad

Nadeem Akhtar vs State of Odisha

Sushant Gautam vs State of Chattisgarh

Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board Regional Office Gwalior through Its Regional Officer vs M/S Sahara Hospital Unit of Chiranjeev Hospital Services Pvt. Ltd. through Its Dean

Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board Regional Office Gwalior through Its Regional Officer vs Rainbow Multispecialty Hospital through Its Occupier

Ashok Patel vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Subhash Chandrawanshi vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Gajendra Singh Rajpoot vs Union of India Ministry of Enviornment Forest & Climate Change through Regional Director

Rajendra Tiwari vs Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change Government of India

Sunlight Minerals vs Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board

Madhukar Malviya vs Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board

Tahir Hussain vs Ministry of Jal Shakti