IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2011 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1933 WA.No. 1453 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.11848/2009 Dated 23/05/2009 .................... APPELLANT: (PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION) ----------------------------------------------- P.M.SURENDRAN, S/O.DAMODARAN, 'PONTHODY MANNAKATH HOUSE', NILAMBUR (P.O), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJESH KORMATH RESPONDENTS: (RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION) ------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, ERNAD, TALUK OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, ERNAD, TALUK OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERAKAMANNA, VILLAGE OFFICE, PERAKAMANNA, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY RANGER, KODUMPUZHA STATION, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. THE RANGE OFFICER, EDAVANNA, RANGE OFFICE, EDAVANNA, EDAVANNA P.O., ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. WA 1453/2009 :2: 7. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NILAMBUR NORTH DIVISION, NILAMBUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 8. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 TO 8 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/06/2011, ALONG WITH WA NO. 1454 OF 2009 & WA NO. 1455 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA 1453/2009 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P1. EXT.P2(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2. EXT.P3(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P3. EXT.P5(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5. EXT.P6(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6. EXT.P8(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P8. EXT.P9(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P9. EXT.P10(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P10. EXT.P11(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P11. EXT.P12(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P12. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE-R7(a) TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENTS IN W.P.(C) NO. 16309/2007. ANNEXURE-R7(b): TRUE COPY OF MAHAZAR DATED 29.6.2008. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE. KNC/- C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. Nos. 1453, 1454 & 1455 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. These connected appeals are filed against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge, giving freedom to the appellants to approach the Divisional Forest Officer with a petition for establishing their title over the property which is disputed by the Forest Department. The appellants are related persons who claim title over around twelve acres of land which is lying near to the forest. The appellants have title, purchase certificates and other documents for the property. However, the appellants' grievance is that they are not able to raise a rubber plantation in the property and the seedlings planted by them have been uprooted and thrown away by the Forest Department. Obviously, the Forest Department maintains the stand that the land is forest land and not of the appellants. Even though the appellants claimed title to the property through sale deed, it is not known why the previous owner could not raise a plantation in the land. In any case, the learned Single Judge has already directed the Divisional Forest Officer to consider the appellants' claim over the property through representation W.A. Nos. 1453, 1454 & 1455/2009 2 filed by them. Of course, if the Divisional Forest Officer feels that the property is private land and not forest land, then the appellants cannot have any grievance. Therefore, we do not find any grievance for the appellants in the Divisional Forest Officer considering their claim. 2. The appellants have a further grievance in the observation of the learned single Judge that the purchase certificate issued by the Land Tribunal is not binding on the Forest Department as the same has an adverse effect for their claim over the property. 3. We notice that the learned Single Judge has only stated that the purchase certificate may not bind the Forest Department. This observation is made because the Forest Department was not a party to the proceedings. In our view, in all cases before the Land Tribunal, for considering issuance of purchase certificate in respect of lands lying nearer to the forest, the Forest Department has a right to be heard. So much so, we cannot find fault with the observation of the learned Single Judge. In any case, since the appellants' rights are not decided by the learned Single Judge, the judgment is not against them. The appellants have also a grievance that the Tribunal constituted for deciding the disputes on Ecologically Fragile Lands has no jurisdiction in the matter. On this issue, the finding of the learned single Judge is that if the Divisional Forest Officer holds that the land is cultivated land falling under the special W.A. Nos. 1453, 1454 & 1455/2009 3 statute, then the Tribunal has to consider the appellants claim. Ofcourse, herein again, we do not think the appellants need to worry about the observations of the learned Single Judge because the appellants rest the claim based on their title deeds. It is always open to the appellants to approach the Forest Tribunal. We therefore, dispose of these writ appeals directing the divisional Forest Officer to consider the appellants' title, possession and other rights over the land involved or any extent thereof and decide the matter so that depending on the decision of the Divisional Forest Officer, the appellants can proceed to establish their claim through appropriate forum or tribunal. Leaving open the appellants' right to choose the form for claiming the relief, we dispose of these writ appeals with a direction to the divisional Forest Officer to communicate his decision in the matter, after hearing the appellants and after verifying the documents submitted before him and after inspecting the site. sd/- C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) sd/- P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE) Knc/-