WJ. BSRS!Hi t)'.1^^^ S-'l«^'-i" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUERE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P. N0. 4^ ^ 2—/ 2005 PETITIONER, ^ .. : ^ Suresh Yadav, S/o- Shri Ujal Yadav, ••^-^.•^'e'^yr aged about 35 years, R/o- Village- v^--^.y^,...••••• ' Pilwapali -Tehsil & District ^'^•••" ^';i^r:S^\>-1"" * Mahasamund (C.G.) ^°~ •3?-v'" >(ff '.&•• V^rsys RESPQNDENTS /' 1. 2. 5, •n--.:" l^ t^^7' 8. Union oflndia, Through the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi. The state of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 1 ,The Secretary, Department of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) The Collector, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) The Divisional Forest Officer, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) The Forest Range Officer, Forest Range, Pithoura, District Mahasamund (C.G.) •The Forest Settlement Officer, Forest Range, Pithoura, District Mahasamund (C.G.) The Tehsildar, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) 'The Chief Conservator of Forest, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUING DIRECTION jn-A-K^SUBt^SUi.-a*—^-——^ -^- XI-HC-78 dwqT<4i^irt<i, y-at<(-i<i<«, Rril'(4y'( ^f M^6L, ll^tOI^TT^ s^, 31T^?T qSR? ('jclijcl^) sii^^rwf^rra? <rai3II^?Tsbficb S^IT8R^rfSCT3II^?T Pilhora 23.9.2005 5hri F.5. are, counsetfo^ Shri Bhisma Kingar, Standi^ig 5hri Sandeep Dubey, 6ovt.| Heard. The petitioner has 226/227 of the Constitution o1 The case of the petitioner Village Pilwapali, Forest Range Pi1|hc As the petitioner is a tandless cultivating the forest land of Compartment No.658 total area years.In the year 1991 under th^ Act, 1980 the then Stateof M.P.I various agriculturists of Village acres out of that 800 acres petitipner herein and villagers o| impression that Bhumiswami rig((t the fiovernment, but when no with other viltagers contacted Depart-ment and they had assure^l other.villagers would be consider^ the petitfoner. Counsel for respondent No.l. Adv. for respondent Nos. 2 to 9. prefer^ed this writ petition under Article sf Ihdia. •ig((t *wfd41-1 *fl+lri)'^"fa'i3 •(Rl't-dl'! ^>3I^IT3II^<1 |is that he is a permonent resident of i, Tehsil & bistrict Mahosamund. a9r'iculturist, therefore, he started about 6 acres situated at Forest 800 acres since 1972 i.e. about 33 e provisions of Forest (Conservation) had granted Bhumiswami right to the Bhetihidih covering an area of 154 land of Compartment No.658. The other adjacent villages were under would also be granted to them by was taken the petitioner along officers of the Forest & Revenue that the case of the petitioner ond afction the fed. But even then no action has been III—-^- ^vci'^wwsi, u>-ril'<i<Ka, Rril<Hy'( «ii*i«ia>»iT^F 31I^9Tq;[^^i^^d^) w^zoo sn^CTwfeira (TaiTSlI^STWWF STOTSR^ifei gn^?T —Z-+ peatedly 4pproached Collefctor taken, therefore, the petition< representation (Annexure P-2) Officer, Pithora in the year l' with other villoigersjret and again made a representatio|i (Annexure P-3). On 5.8.2004, Minister directed -the Compartment No.658 throu^h 12.10.2004 the Deput/ Coll^ Additional Tehsildar, .Pithourti immediatety after survey of th^ Additional Tehsildar conducted a map of Compartment No.65| Kishanpur & Vcm 6ram Sami) 27.5.2005 (Annexure P-8 & P[ heard fromthe side of respondf Now the Forest (Conser)/ referred to as "Rules of 2003"b Rules of 2003 a porest Adv| Regional Empowered Committe^ fiovemment and the^ Comm) opiniojL in all the matters <pi<itc><Ili *ii*K'>T*t"Kl<1) •<R|<^I'( ^)3lf^T3II^?T [r alon9 with other vilkxgers made a 1^> respondertt No.7-Forest Sett-lement (94. Thereafter, the petitioner along the re^)ondent cuthorities ^ to the Chief Minister of the State the Joint Secretary to 1he Chief Mahasamund for survey of the Revenue Department. On ictor, Land Records directed the for sending the repre^ntation Compartment No.658 as per rule. The jthe survey on 30.12.2004, thereafter, p wos prepared and 6ram Panchayat 1'i hwe also given no objection on L9), but even then nothing has been snts authorities. /ation) Rules, 2003 (hereinafter shall has been framed and under Rule 3 of ^ory Cominittee and under Rule 4 a has been constituted by the Central ^-tees hwe power to decide or give relating to the forest. The State .'^r~t/r~/~w/jnjrt/\r'--^»»^f\f^f\ -/. I ^ ^JA-CL /z \;j-OT|r<i|<lK?)q,tj>-CT|ii.|iK»^Rriroy't *11*lrii^WrcF 3tI^Tq?^(^crfggs) ^200 gn^?iTTR'ii<i) ?-~T3ii$?iai'ira; S^ITW^ifer an^n ^overnment is requirecl to send tl' ^nder sub-rule (4) of Rule 6 of pentral Sovemment. Ultimately, ij^spondents be directed to grant jier rule, over 6 acres of land. .Counsel for the.petitioner- [ipplied for user of the land in porm A & B <js per Rule 6 of thi l^uthorities are not enquiring in^ pierefore, they be directed to IStonding Counsel for responden-1 ^dvocate for respondent Nos.2 to The prayer made by counse Ifgir ond recfionable, therefore, iroposal of petitioner examined in in case proposat is found to be ^then respondent No.2 should send bccordouice with the Rules of 20031 With the direction aforesaid We Consequently, M.PA/.)P. N stond disposed of. < Certified copy as per rules. ;wi<ifo41i *iii«l"i|'fei41•<R|'(^N ^lSlf^ISIl^f |e proposal to -the concemed authority Rutes of 2003 for approval of the ^ a prayer hflfi been: nude that the Bhumiswami ri9ht to the petitioner, os 4'bmits that ttie petitfoner has aireody que^tion before •the concerned authority in Rules of 2003, but the Forest State t-o and not taking appropriate action. taf<e appropriate action, to which learned Nos.l Shri Kingar & learned 6ovt. Shri Dubey, have no objection. for the petitioner appears to be just, sspondent No.2 is directed to get the laccordance with the Kules of 2003 and acc4otable and covered under the said rules, his report to the Central fiovernment in [within aperiod of 06 months. the petition stands disposed of. 3.3700/05 & I.A. No.8227/05 also rfe Sd/. L.C. Bhadoo juage