Environment – Wildlife Sanctuary – Forest Land – Permission to construct a health/eco-resort – Applicant had preferred an application to the Central Empowered Committee and sought permission to construct the health/eco-resort on plot nos. 14/3 and 14/4 asserting that the said chunk of land was not a forest land – However, the prayer made by the applicant was not accepted whereupon, the applications under consideration came to be filed before the Supreme Court – It was contended by the State that the plots in question are subject matter of litigation in writ appeal pending before the High Court and applicant should wait the outcome of the aforesaid writ appeal: Held: The issue raised by the State of Madhya Pradesh is with respect to the identification of the land owned by the applicant contending that the same forms a part of the Pachmarhi Wildlife Sanctuary – There have been various rounds of litigation and it is not in dispute that applicant herein was never impleaded in any of the proceedings before the Revenue Courts or the High Court – An order passed by the District Collector dated 09.08.2004, purportedly covers entire area of the Plot No. 14 and the transactions done in favour of and by one D, the sale deed executed in favour of the applicant and the mutation made in its name had never been questioned in any Court of law – Neither the Revenue Department nor the State Government authorities took the trouble of impleading the applicant as party in any of the litigations – The title acquired by the applicant over the subject plots not having been challenged, attainted finality and thus the State cannot claim a right thereupon simply because at some point of time, the plots came to be recorded as Nazul lands in the revenue records – The categoric stand in the compliance affidavit filed by the State fortifies the claim of the applicant that these plots are falling under the urban area – In this background, the appellant is justified in claiming that its proprietary rights guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution cannot be infringed merely on account of the pending writ appeal before the High Court – Nonetheless, the applicant would satisfy the authorities that the plots in question are beyond the Eco-Sensitive Zone – Therefore, it is directed that the application filed by the applicant for raising construction on plot Nos. 14/3 and 14/4 shall be decided objectively by the CEC/Competent Authority of the local body keeping in view the location of the land with reference to the notified boundaries of the ESZ. [Paras 8, 19, 20, 21, 23]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. 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.