!OIE BEK IN THE HIGH COURT OF 3UDICATUERE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) W.P.NO. ^-S~^§ /2005 PETITIONER "\ '^ '-'y, Versus RESPONDENTS ^l. ^./>, ,\o..;--s^' .••••' ^.-^'./ f .<e'5 .®Jr o:o"^c.-"' /^w ^ rk..^* .^y ^- ^" 1^-; ?x ../ ..^. '"' // 2. ^4. 5. -^. ^7. 8. /, %@£- Gaitram Yadav, S/o- Shri Latelram, aged about 37 years, R/o- Village- Bhithideeh Tehsil & District Mahasamund (C.G.) U.nion 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, '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, Pithoyra, 'District Mahasamund (C.G.) The Tehsildar, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund The Chief Conservator of Forest, .Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUING DIRECTION 41l*1rtI^TT^ \iT;q^4|^trtA|,y-rfl-(i<|cS, ^lriK-iy'' .w.^..t/.^.7.3./?.^'.. an^siwf^lra; (Tansn^Tfptira 3H^9T qgq? (ijc|(je|^i) ^200 s^nw^fsa OT^ST 23.9.2005 Shri F.5. Khare,counsel Shri Bhisma Kin9ar, Stoa Shri Sandeep bubey, 60 Heard. The petitioner has prel 226/227 of the Constitution ol The case of the petitio( Village gty-Ku ctffl^ , Foi Mahasamund. As the petition^ he started cultivating the fo| 33 years. In the year l^ (Conservation) Act, 1980 t(i Bhumiswami right to the var covering an area of 154 a Compartment No.658. The p <bWtd41.i *ll*<dT^'fe'<3 -((ul^K ^>3lf^T311^?T for the petitioner. ^ ding Counsel for respondent No.l. 1't. Adv. for respondent Nos. 2 to 9. ferred tiiis writ petition under Article If India. )er is that he is a permanent resident of fest Ran9e Pithora, Tehsil & bistrict is a landless a9ricultunst, therefore, 'est bnd of about 6 acres situated at Forest Compartment No.658 t^tal area 800 acras since 1972 i.e. about 91 under the provisions of Forest e then State of M.P. had gronted ous agriculturists of Vilkige Bhetihidih :res out of that 800 acres lond of ititioner herein and villagers of other cdjacent villagcs were under impression that Bhumiswami right would also be granted to them by ~^ne (Sovemment, but when no action was taken the petitioner along wi-^h other villagers contacted the officers of the Forest & Revenue Def artment and they had assurgd that ttie case of^the petitioner and o^+ier villa9ers would be considered. But SP/FS/2005-20.TIOO XI-HC-78 vjT.r) -^||<41rt<4, y-fll-(-l<|d, Rrtl't-iy *iHrii a?'n^ STI^STtRR) (c|c|(j6|,g) ^Ft.200 SD^STqiTf^IPR nafrsn^sisbii'h BTaiw^cTsn^si ~- ')-• even then no action has been tc with other villagers made a respondent No-7-Forest Setl'lemi Thereafter, the petitioner alo^ig approached the respondeht representation to the Chief Mini 5.8.2004, the Joint Secretar/ Collector, Mahasamund for surv) the Revenue Departrnent. On 1; Records directed the Additional representation immediately afte as per rule. The Additionat 30.12.2004, thereafter, a map o) and Srvm Panchayat Kishanpur 4 objection on 27.5.2005 (Annexu has been heard from the side of Now the Forest (Conservj referred to as "Rules of 2003")] Rules of 2003 a Forest Mvi^pry Regional Ewpow&red Committee fiovernment and these Committl opinion in all the matters r^ <pl<l(n<ili l!lrtl'it'lsLel ^Rx-dK ^i3lf^qafr^?T 4<en, therefore, the petitioner along representation (Annexure P-2) to ^nt Officer.Pithora in the year 1994. with other vilki9ers repeatedly authorities and again made a ^ter of the State (Annexure P-3). On fro the Chief Minister directed the ^y of Compartment No.658 through 1.10.2004 the Daput/ Collector, Land Tehsildar, Pithoura for sending the survey of the Compartment No.658 |ehsildar conducted the survey on Compartment No.658 was prepared Van Sram Samiti have also given no -e P-8 & P-9), but even then nothing respondents authorities. ition) ftules, 2003 (hereinafter shall las been framed and under Rule 3 of Committee and under Rule 4 a has been constituted by the Centrat tees have power to decide or give ;lating ' to the fcrest. The State XI-HC-78 ^S^Sf'-WSV, u>-nl'<-i<|(i, fsirti^y'; *11*1rtl a?»TT^ SII^^Tq^I? (^dljcl^) ^200 sii^ii<pi R'li* nw3n^?i*ii<»i ?7ai<R^fei3n^sT -3" 4>l-I|Iri41-) *1!>1«T*t'l^i<3<R|«|< ^sif^tTsn^sr povernment is required to send t^ie proposal to the concerned outhonty [jnder sub-rule (4) of Rule 6 of ^entral (Sovernment. Ultimately, ^espondents be directed to grant fcer rule, over 6 acres of land. Counsel for the petitioner ^pptied for user of the land in que Form A & B as per Rule 6 of thi •fhe Rules of 2003 for approval of the a prayer has been made that •Hie Bhumiswami right to the petitioner, as iubmits that the petitioner has already stion before tfie concemed au'rtiority in Rules of 2003, but the Forest State Authorities are not enquiring in(to and not taking appropriate action. Therefore, they be directed to ti^ Standing Counsel for responden Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to The prayer made by couns^ fair oind reasonable, therefore, 4 proposal of petitioner" examined \r\ in case proposal is found to be acc( then respondent No.2 should senc^ accordance with the Rules of 2003 With the direction aforesai) Consequently, M.(W-y.No. stand disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. ike appropriate action.to which learned Nos.l Shri Kingar & leamed 60vt. 19 Shri Dubey, howe no objection. for the petitioner appears to be just, espondent No.2 is directed to get the accordance with the Kules of 2003 and iptable and covered under the said rules, in his report to the Central (Sovernment i within a period of 06 months. , the petition stands disposed of. •7>f/05 & I.A. No.s-z39 /05 also Sd/- I...C. BhacSoo ae