Facts
The petitioner was granted a patta for 4.90 acres of land in Village Surajpura, Chhatarpur.
Source reference: para. 2The Collector subsequently cancelled the patta in suo-moto proceedings, asserting the land was notified Forest land.
Source reference: para. 2The High Court directed fresh demarcation in the petitioner's presence due to natural justice violations in an earlier writ petition (W.P. 9520/2014).
Source reference: paras. 2-3The Additional Collector reaffirmed the cancellation on 31.01.2024, and the petitioner challenged this order and the subsequent dismissal of their appeal.
Source reference: paras. 2-3, 6Issues
1. Whether the subject land was validly identified as notified forest land, thereby rendering the patta allotment void ab initio.
Source reference: para. 10-112. Whether the demarcation and hearing conducted by the revenue authorities complied with the principles of natural justice and the previous directions of the High Court.
Source reference: para. 9-10Law Applied
Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, which prohibits the use of forest land for non-forest purposes without prior Central Government approval.
Source reference: para. 7T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997) 2 SCC 267, which expanded the definition of "forest" to include all areas recorded as such in government records regardless of ownership.
Source reference: paras. 6-7, 11State Revenue Department Circular dated 13.01.1997 regarding the criteria for treating land as "forest" based on standing tree density.
Source reference: para. 6Reasoning
The Court observed that following its previous remand order, a fresh demarcation was carried out in the petitioner’s presence (Annexure P-10), a fact the petitioner did not dispute.
Source reference: para. 10The Court noted that although the petitioner argued that the land did not meet the tree-density requirements of the 1997 Circular, the Tehsildar and the Board of Revenue had consistently recorded the area as a "notified forest" as far back as 2000.
Source reference: para. 11During the fresh demarcation and the proceedings before the Collector, the petitioner failed to provide evidence to rebut the "forest" status or raise a formal protest against the nature of the land.
Source reference: paras. 10-11Applying the T.N. Godavarman principle, the Court reasoned that if the land is earmarked as forest, any patta allotment without statutory forest clearance is legally unsustainable.
Source reference: para. 11Holding
The Court held that because the land was notified forest land, the patta was invalid and the Collector's order was justified.
The Court found no procedural impropriety in the demarcation process.
Source reference: para. 11The Writ Petition was dismissed, affirming the orders dated 31.01.2024 and 20.05.2024.
Source reference: para. 12Original Court PDF
Sudha ChoubeyvsThe State Of Madhya Pradesh
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in