Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 – ss. 2(f), 3, 4, 8 & 13 – Kerala Private Forest (Tribunal) Rules, 1972 – r.2A – Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961– s.5 – Area/land in question was notified as vested Forest u/s. 4 of 1971 Act –Land Tribunal issued Purchase Certificates in favour of respondents which was later on cancelled – In writ Petition before High Court, respondents submitted that when they are in possession of the properties in question, the revenue authorities are obliged and bound to accept the basic tax, leviable under the 1961 Act –Whether the High Court erred in issuing the writ of mandamus directing the appellants to accept the basic tax from respondents – Held: Respondent nos. 1 &
2 cannot claim any right over the disputed lands in question considering the notification issued under Rule 2A declaring the lands in question as vested forest land and no jenmam rights and/or purchase certificates in favour of the respondents with respect to the lands in question – Respondents cannot be said to be the owner and/or cannot be said to be having a valid title in their favour – Therefore, there is no question of any acceptance of basic tax from respondents, leviable under the 1961 Act – High Court did not properly appreciate the mala fide intention on the part of respondents to pray for such a writ and indirectly establishing their right, title and ownership over the disputed lands in question which, as such, is declared as a vested forest land – Impugned judgment and order set aside.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The respondents filed writ petition before the High Court for a writ of mandamus directing the revenue authorities and more particularly the Village Officer to accept the basic tax leviable under section 5 of the 1961 Act with respect to the lands in question. The said writ petition was filed on the premise that they are the owner and in possession of the disputed land and jenmam rights and purchase certificates were issued in their favour and that their possession and ownership have been admitted by the Divisional Forest Officer in the two counter affidavits filed before the Tribunal in OA Nos. 13 & 14 of 1986. The High Court has accepted the same and issued a writ of mandamus directing the revenue authorities – Village Officer to accept the basic tax from the respondents. [Para 5.1][985-C-E]
2. However, the High Court has not at all appreciated and/or considered the fact that as such the jenmam rights and purchase certificates which were earlier issued in the years 1975 & 1979 in favour of the respondents have been cancelled by the appropriate authority. The High Court has also not appreciated the fact that as such a notification has been issued under Rule 2A of the Kerala Private Forest (Tribunal) Rules, 1972 and the lands in question have been declared as a “private forest land”, vide notification issued in the year 1977. The private respondent nos.
1 & 2 filed an application under Section 8 of the 1971 Act challenging the said notification and vesting of the lands in question as a private forest land and declaring the same as a forest land, however, the said application came to be dismissed by the Forest Tribunal, vide order dated 12.3.1990 and thereafter there is no challenge to the aforesaid notification including the land in question as a vested forest land. [Para 5.2][985-F-H; 986A]
3. The High Court has also not appreciated that in order dated 16.4.2002 passed by the Land Tribunal cancelling the order of assignment of jenmam rights and certificates of purchase, the Land Tribunal specifically observed that OA applicants failed to establish tenancy rights claimed by them and the survey plan clearly shows that the lands in question are covered by the vested forest land of the government. Thus, as per the Land Tribunal, respondent nos. 1 & 2 cannot claim any right over the disputed lands in question. Once the notification issued under Section 2A of the 1972 Rules declaring the lands in question as vested forest land stands and as on today there is no jenmam rights and/or purchase certificates in favour of the respondents with respect to the lands in question, respondent nos. 1 & 2 cannot be said to be the owner and/or cannot be said to be having a valid title in their favour and therefore there is no question of any acceptance of basic tax from them, leviable under the 1961 Act. It appears that by asking such a relief of writ of mandamus directing the Village Officer/revenue authorities to accept the basic tax from them, the original writ petitioners – respondents want to create title/ownership in their favour. Any dispute with respect to the forest land can only be settled under Section 8 of the 1971 Act. Therefore, the High Court has not properly appreciated the mala fide intention on the part of the respondents to pray for such a writ of mandamus and indirectly establishing their right, title and ownership over the disputed lands in question which, as such, is declared as a vested forest land as far back as in the years 1975/1977, pursuant to the notification issued under Rule 2A of the 1972 Rules. [Para 6][986-B-F]
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.