^ ^E IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUERE AT BILASPUR^rC.GJ W.P.NO. ^2005 III PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^^" l^^y Versus 1. 3. s^vy 7- ?>•• ^\.o 8. ^yi^- Bhuru Kaiwart S/o- Shri Nanhu Kaiwart, aged about 35 years, R/o- Village- Kachhardih, Tehsil & District Mahasamund (C.G.) Union of India, 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.) The Secretary, Department of Forest, O.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, Pithou'ra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) The Forest Settlement Officer, Forest Range, Pithoura, District Mahasamund (C.G.) The Tehsildar, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund ./-'' The Chief Conservator of Forest, .Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) i tt- l (p WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA FOR ISSUING^IRECTIQN \}wi-^iqirto, u>-n1<(-i<i<», Rril'(-iy'< *il*l«7^HTq»—••"——•••—•—•...— -^ ) an^TTTR-fith g2n3fi4!!iai*iw .ti.i :i 1 II rl Ifl'i! SIT^ST <raq? (tjcii^d^) ^200 ?TaT(R^TfgcT3n^T[ 23.9,2005 Shri F.5. Khare,counsel Shri Bhisma Kingar, Stai Shri Sandeep Dubey, Q'o Heard. The petitioner has prel 226/227 of the Constitution o! The case of the petitioi Village K'<c.^*\qr'ot--'tv , poi Maho.samund. As the petition< he started cultivatin9 the fo Forest Compartment No.658 33 years. In ttie year l^ Bhumiswaini right to the var covering an area of 154 a Compartment No.658. The p' adjacent vilhg&s were under also be granted to them by taken tde petitioner alon9 wi' of the Forest & Revenue Det <bl^(d^-111*f»T^fei<SI•(Rt^K ^ai^TS]l^?T for the petitioiner. \d\ng Counsel for respondent No.l. ^t. Adv. for respondent Nos. 2 to 9. ferred this writ petition undsr Article f India. er is that he is a permanent resident of |est Range Pithora, Tehsil & &is+rict is a landtess agriculturist, therefore, •est land of about 6 acres situated at )tal area 800 acres since 1972 i.e. about 191 under the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 t^ie then State of M.P. had gronted lous agriculturists of Vilbge Bhetihidih :res out of that 800 acres land of ititioner herein and villagers of other impression that Bhumiswami right would ic Sovemment, but when no action was other villagers contacted the officers artment and they had assured -rfiat the cdse of the petitroner ond o^her vitlagers would be considered. But XI-HC-78 YJT.TI-qi<.||rt<i^t?-^^<|<a^R|ri|^y^ ^^^j ••H :ir *ii*i«iiRTrT^' ^200 3n^5TlRc|! (ijclf^^) 3II^?IWft'<i<b gwan^iBilTO i5! gTBTSR^tf 311^91 _. 2-" even then no actioh has been tc with other villagers made a respondent No.7-ForestSetttemi Thereafter, the petitioner alo approached 1+ie rgspondfent I" ' •'.'/" '. • ' : ^. . representatiM) to the Chief^ Minii 5.8.2004, tfi®jjoint Secretary ^<en, therefore, the petitioner along representation (Annexure P-2) to ^nt Officer, Pithora in •theyear 1994. (ig with otfier vilkigers repeatedly lauthorities and again made a tterof the State (Annexyre P-3). On It-o the Chief Minister directed the Records direetecl the Additional Fepresentation immediately,afte| as per rule. |The Additional 30.12.2(X)4, thereafter, a mop o|[ ^dnd 6ram Panehayat, Kishanpur 4 objecl-ion on| 27.5.2005 (Annexuj has been hearcl fr-om the sideofl Now the Forest (Conservt referred to as °Kules of 2003") | ;,,- <o|<ifCT«l-iii*inYfffe><l,'<Rl-(^l< ^?3lRpT3II^?T |£ollector, A\<ih]asamynd for Syrv^Y of Compartment Np.658 through ;the RertaenuellCiepartrnent. ^On 1^.10.2004 the Deputy Collector, Land Tehsildap, Pithoura for sendingl the survey of the Comparhnent No;.658 ehsildar conducted -riie survey on Compartment No.658 was prepiar'ed Vom 6ram Samiti have atsp givgn no •e P-8 A P-9), but even then nothing •espondents authorities. \ ition) Rules, 2003 (hereinafterjshqll ios been framed and under Rule| 3 o-f | Rules of 2QQ3 a Forest Adv'\^pry Committee and under| Rulei j4 ia| ftegional Empowered Cotnmittee has heea- constituted by the' ^rE6rjnt Sovernmen-tl and these Committ^es hiave power to decide orj jgii»ej li-l!;?;ii opinion in .a|t the mcrt-t-ers [t^latingf ^to ^tfeie^ forest. .The jS|o|? ,ii;:aa llll ):j!j! ;i;ll XI-HC-78 VJT>^ -^Kiiriy, yfllfrid, Rrtl<!-ty-< *ll*lrtl SpqT^ 3TT^?T iRtF (^cl(^cT^) ^200 STF^STW R-li<h cCTsn^STriitfi* s^nwwfeTsn^ii -z- ^ovemment is required to send [jnder sub-rule (4) of Rule 6 of Jentral (Sovernment. Ultimately, ^espondents be directed to grani fc>er ruie, over 6 acres of land. Counsel for the petitioner ^ipplied for user of the land in Form A & B as per Rule 6 of thi Authorities are not enquiring \r\ Therefore, they be directed to ti^ Standing Counsel for respondenj Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to The prayer made by couns^ fair and rea.sonable, therefore, t)< proposal of petitioner examined ir| in case proposal is found to be acc^ then respondent No.2 should senc^ occordance with the Ruies of 200$ With tiie dipection aforesaii •nie proposal to the concerned authority •^ne Rutes of 2003 for approval of •the a prayer h8s been made that the Bhumiswami right to the petitioner, as qu^stio intto Consequently, M.(W.)P.No. stond. disposed of. Certified coof cs per rules. <ni<<(<-»<I1-)*lMriVit'fet8'rf^R5R ^ari^qsn^;! ^ubmits -that the petitioner has already ^stion before the concemed authority in Rules of 2003, but the Forest State and not taking appropriate action. ike appropriate action, to which learned ift Nos.l 5hri Kingar &. leamed 6ovt. 9 5hri Dubey,have no objection. for the petitioner appears to be just, ispondent No.2 is directed to get the accordonce with the Rules of 2003 cind iptable ond covered under the saici rules, his report to the Centrat (Sovernment in within a period of 06 months. I, the petition stands disposed of. ^7»^/05 & I.A. No. aaa5 /Q5 also Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo juaoe