Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 – s.2 – Restriction on the dereservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purpose – Certain land notified as a reserved forest under the 1878 Act, and a portion was de-reserved but remaining land of village Kondhwa Budruk in District Pune continued to be forest land – Different parcel of land acquired from C family and as an alternative for their resettlement, subject land allotted to family for cultivation on Eksaali-yearly basis, which was never renewed – In 1988, C family applied for permanent release of subject land – Recommendation of the Divisional Commissioner to allot the entire land in favour of C and no necessity to obtain prior approval of Central Government – Thereafter, Minister of Revenue, State Government on advise by the legal department sanctioned the allotment to C – Issuance of allotment order by the Collector – Thereafter, the Divisional Commissioner granted permission to C family to sell land to promoter of the Housing Society for residential purposes – Allotment of reserved forest land to private persons for construction of buildings in violation of 1980 Act – Legality: Held: Allotment of 11.89 ha of Reserve Forest land of village Kondhwa Budruk in District Pune for agriculture purposes in 1998 and subsequent permission given for its sale in favour of Housing Society totally illegal – Said land was notified as Reserved Forest and which reservation continues to be so till date – Nothing on record to show that land was permitted to be used by State for any non-forest purposes prior to 1980 – After the 1980 Act came into effect, no forest land could be de-reserved without the prior approval of the Central Government, also the Forest land could not be assigned either by way of lease or any other mode to any private person without the approval – Opinion given by Law Department, the order approving allotment in favour of the family issued by State Government, and the order of allotment by the Collector took place well after directions were issued by Supreme Court – Decision of the State Government of allotting the land and implementing the same by the Collector not sustainable in law – Furthermore, the doctrine of desuetude not applicable – Subject land has continuously been recorded as ‘Reserved Forest’ in forest records – Forest Authorities through a number of communications had requested Revenue Authorities to correct the revenue entries and transfer the land to the Forest Department – It cannot be said that notification issued under 1878 Act has been put to disuse for a long time – Nothing on record to show that a practice contrary to the provisions of the Act was being applied – Also, the Minister for Revenue and Divisional Commissioner gave a total go-bye to the doctrine of public trust – Furthermore, entries in revenue records do not confer title to property – Much prior to actual allotment of land in the favour of the Housing Society, C family had already entered into transactions with builders – Housing Society could not be said to be a bonafide purchaser of the subject land – C family was only set up as a front for the benefit of the Developers – Agricultural land of C family was acquired, was being misused by the developers as a pretext for grabbing the valuable piece of Forest Land for the purposes of commercial development – Transactions between the Housing Society and C family totally illegal and contrary to the conditions on which the land was allotted to C family – Housing Society not entitled to allotment of alternative piece of land, as that would amount to granting a premium to Housing Society for illegalities committed by them – Allotment of the subject land to C family in blatant disregard to the provisions of the law as well as the directions issued by this Court from time to time, as also ignoring the communications of the Forest Department that the said land could not be allotted inasmuch as, the same was classified as a Forest Land – In view thereof, the environmental clearance granted to Housing Society illegal and is quashed and set aside – Possession of the land, reserved as Forest Land, and are in possession of Revenue Department, to be handed over to Forest Department – Special Investigation Teams to be constituted to examine if any of the reserved Forest Land in the possession of the Revenue Department has been allotted to any private individuals/institutions for the purpose other than the forestry purpose – Government to take steps to take back the possession of such land and handover the same to the Forest Department, and in case, taking back not in the larger public interest, the governments to recover the cost of the said land from the allottees and use the said amount for development of forests – Special Teams to ensure that all such transfers take place within the stipulated period and such land to be used only for the purpose of afforestation – Forest Act, 1878. [Paras 20-22, 24, 28, 37, 38, 43, 44, 47, 52, 64, 71, 73, 77, 90, 91, 95] Doctrines – Doctrine of desuetude – Applicability: Held: For applicability of the doctrine of desuetude, the statute must not only be required to be in disuse for long duration but instead a contrary practice must also be prevalent. [Para 42]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.