Sunita Bai Gond vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
1 WP-32721-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
th
ON THE 9 OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 32721 of 2026
SUNITA BAI GOND AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Ram Sharan Rathore - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Nilesh Yadav - Additional Advocate General with Shri Gajendra
Parashar - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Per: Vivek Rusia, Acting Chief Justice
The petitioners have filed this writ petition in the nature of Public
Interest Litigation alleging illegal, arbitrary and malafide action on the part
of the respondents/Forest Authorities, who have granted right, title and
interest with respect to the vast Reserved Forest Land bearing Compartment
No.RF-279 dated 22.08.2020 (Annexure- P/1), total area 40.711 Hectare
situated at Village Anjani which falls under jurisdiction of Gram Panchayat
Semarwar, Janpad Panchayat Jaithari, District- Anuppur to 51 persons, who
have already owned and possessed alternate lands in Village Kholadi.
2. Facts of the case, in short, are as under :-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
2 WP-32721-2026
(i) The petitioner no.1 is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Semarwar,

Janpad Panchayat Jaithari, District Anuppur and petitioner no.2 also belongs
to the same Village and is a Social Worker.
(ii). The respondents are Authorities of the State and are covered
under the definition of the word "State" enshrined under Article 12 of the
Constitution of India. The respondents/Authorities granted right, title and
interest with respect to the vast Reserved Forest Land bearing Compartment
No.RF-279 dated 22.08.2020 (Annexure- P/1), total area 40.711 hectares
situated at Village Anjani falls under the jurisdiction of Gram Panchayat
Semarwar, Janpad Panchayat Jaithari, District-Anuppur, to 51 persons, who
have already owned and possessed alternate lands in Village Kholadi.
(iii) According to the petitioner, 51 persons (List annexed as
Annexure -P/2), who were granted patta, were "disentitled" as per the
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of
Forest Rights) Act, 2006 alongwith Rules, 2008 and Amendment Rules,
2012 without compliance with mandatory provisions of Indian Forest Act,
1927 and other relevant provisions.
(iv) According to the petitioners, after having knowledge about the
aforesaid fact, the petitioners made representations dated 05.10.2021,
29.08.2023 and 04.11.2024 (cumulatively annexed as Annexure- P/3), duly
signed by petitioners and other villagers to the concerned
respondents/Authorities with a request to conduct transparent and impartial
enquiry in the matter.
(v) With respect to the aforesaid representations, the Respondent
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
3 WP-32721-2026
No.5/Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Anuppur issued various

letters dated 27.09.2023, 09.11.2023, 29.11.2023 and 05.03.2024
(cumulatively annexed as Annexure- P/4) to Respondent No.7 vide which
directions for conducting enquiry and submitting the report regarding the
same were given. However, the aforementioned communication letters
exchanged between Respondent No.5 and Respondent No.7 was a futile
exercise without any fruitful result, as a result of which, the Petitioner No.2-
Preetam Singh filed an application dated 04.04.2024 under Right to
Information Act, 2005 for fetching information regarding the plantation over
land in question, to which, Respondent No.7 vide response letter dated
02.05.2024 (Annexure- P/5), supplied the information, stating that in the year
2011, the plantation of total 8300 plants were done.
(vi) A Spot Panchnama dated 29.01.2025 (Annexure- P/6) was
prepared by the Beat Guard, Thondipani, in which it was stated that, as per
the villagers, the planted trees have been cut from the forest area of the
aforesaid land in question and encroachments have been there and the
beneficiaries to whom the right of ownership has been allotted, have already
owned and possessed alternative lands.
(vii) According to the petitioner, a resolution dated 28.01.2025 was
passed by Gram Panchayat, Semarwar cancelling the lease/patta to 51
persons as referred to in the list contained in Annexure- P/2. The said Gram
Panchayat passed another resolution dated 26.06.2025 in favour of the
petitioners authorising them to file Public Interest Litigation before this
Court.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
4 WP-32721-2026
(viii) In pursuance of the aforesaid resolution dated 26.06.2025, the

petitioner filed Writ Petition No.39300/2025 (Sunita Bai Gond and Others
Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others) in the Public Interest
Litigation on the same subject matter and vide order dated 05.03.2026
(Annexure- P/8), this Court withdrew the said Writ Petition by allowing the
prayer of withdrawal made by the petitioner by reserving their rights to
approach the Competent Authority. In compliance with the aforesaid order,
the petitioners, vide representation dated 15.05.2026 (Annexure- P/10)
approached the Competent Authority i.e. Respondents No.1 and 2 as well as
Respondents No.9 to 14 who are President, Members & Secretary under the
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of
Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and Rules, 2008, but it is still pending consideration
and has not been decided by the aforementioned respondents yet. Hence, this
present petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation is filed before this
Court.
Submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to the illegal
activities of the respondents/Authorities in granting right, title and interest
with regard to the land in question to the disentitled persons, the
environment and wildlife has been adversely affected which in turn is also
increasing corruption by transferring the land to those who are not entitled to
it.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the land in
question was reserved for plantation purposes and in the year 2011, a total of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
5 WP-32721-2026
8300 trees were planted. In this plantation process, the Government incurred

expenditure of crores of rupees, which is from the public exchequer.
Therefore, in these circumstances, if the allotment of the forest land in
question to disentitled persons is not cancelled with immediate effect, the
same will cause grave harm to the entire forest area, and the expenditure
incurred by the Government in the plantation process will become useless
and will be a complete misuse of government funds. Also, the conduct of
respondents/Authorities is a complete violation of the Indian Forest Act,
1927 by allotting land to other disentitled persons/villagers of Gram
Panchayat, Kholadi.
5 Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the
respondents/Authorities failed to consider and decide their representation
dated 15.05.2026 which was made in compliance of order dated 05.03.2026
passed in Writ Petition No.39300/2025, without any valid reason, thereby
resulting in gross miscarriage of justice.
6. Shri Nilesh Yadav - Additional Advocate General opposes the
above submissions on the ground that the petitioner, being a sarpanch of the
Gram Panchayat, has no locus to file the Public Interest Litigation, as the
individuals who were aspirants for the allotment may come directly to this
court. Hence, the Public Interest Litigation being a personal interest petition,
be dismissed.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
7. The main grievance of the petitioners is that the District Level
Committee, Anuppur, had allotted forest land of Compartment no.RF-279 on
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
6 WP-32721-2026
lease contrary to the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other

Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act,
2006 alongwith Rules, 2008. The petitioners are seeking cancellation of the
lease granted in the year 2020. All those allottees have not been made
respondents in this petition; therefore, without giving them an opportunity of
hearing, the validity of leases cannot be examined. The petitioners have also
not disclosed as to which provisions of the Act of 2006 and Rules have been
violated by the Committee.
8 . In the case of State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal &
Ors. reported in (2010) 3 SCC 402, the Supreme Court of India laid down
comprehensive guidelines to curb the abuse of PILs. The Supreme Court held
that courts must strictly satisfy themselves about the bona fides of the
petitioner and ensure that the petition is not filed for personal gain, private
motive, or oblique considerations. In Guruvayur Devaswom Managing
Committee v. C.K. Rajan, (2003) 7 SCC 546, the Court clarified that a public
interest litigation is not maintainable if it seeks to enforce individual rights or
personal grievances. When a person is directly or personally affected by an
action, they must pursue standard legal remedies rather than disguising a
personal dispute as a PIL and in the case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India
reported in (1981) Supp SCC 87 also Apex court held that while expanding
locus standi for public-spirited citizens to espouse the cause of
disadvantaged groups, the Constitutional Bench explicitly held that any
person acting out of personal interest, individual grudge, or private gain has
no standing to invoke PIL jurisdiction.
9. The petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of PIL i.e W.P
No. 39300/2025, which was permitted to be withdrawn vide order dated 5th
March, 2026 (Annexure P-8) reserving the rights of the petitioners to
approach the competent authority. After the aforesaid order, the petitioner
sent a representation to the Principal Secretary by way of registered post.
There is no acknowledgement to show that this representation has been
received. Six annexures were annexed with the representation; they have not
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:69665
7 WP-32721-2026
been filed with this petition; therefore, the allegations levelled by the

petitioners are very vague in nature as to how this patta/lease granted to 51
persons/beneficiary is contrary to the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional
Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 alongwith Rules,
2008. Therefore, this petition is devoid of merits. Hence, the same is
dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE
Shivani

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TARUN KUMAR
SALUNKE
Signing time: 15-09-2026
17:54:14