Chhattisgarh HC Bars Eviction And House Demolition Of Two Families From Forest Land Until Forest Rights Act Claims Are Decided

In brief

The question

1. Whether long-standing possession, construction of a residence, or landless status by itself establishes a right to Van Adhikar Patta over Government forest land.

The court held

The Court did not determine whether either petitioner was eligible for Van Adhikar Patta.

It also directed

It directed the petitioners to approach the competent authorities under the 2006 Act and the Rules within 30 days of receiving the order; the authorities must hear them, consider their evidence, and issue reasoned orders in accordance with law.

No coercive eviction or demolition may take place until the claims are decided, subject to the outcome of those proceedings.

Both petitions were disposed of, with no order as to costs.

01Facts

The petitioners challenged orders rejecting their applications for Van Adhikar Patta over land they claimed to have occupied for many years, and the consequential eviction proceedings.

¶ 3–7

They alleged that the rejection was made without an enquiry or hearing and without considering a Patwari and Gram Panchayat Panchnama.

¶ 3–7

One petitioner’s appeal was dismissed on the ground that no appeal was available.

¶ 3–7

The State contended that the petitioners were unauthorised occupants of forest land and had not established eligibility under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (“the 2006 Act”).

¶ 3–7

02Issues

i.1. Whether long-standing possession, construction of a residence, or landless status by itself establishes a right to Van Adhikar Patta over Government forest land.

¶ 8, 10

ii.2. Whether the petitioners’ claims for recognition of forest rights should be determined through the procedure prescribed under the 2006 Act and the Rules framed thereunder.

¶ 9, 12

iii.3. Whether eviction or demolition could proceed while the petitioners’ claims were awaiting consideration by the competent authorities.

¶ 17

03Law Applied

The 2006 Act and the Rules framed thereunder prescribe the process for recognition and vesting of forest rights: the Gram Sabha initiates determination of claims, with subsequent examination by the Sub-Divisional Level Committee and District Level Committee.

¶ 8–10

Long possession of Government forest land, even with a residential structure, does not by itself confer ownership or leasehold rights; a claimant must establish statutory eligibility.

¶ 8–10

A Patwari or Gram Panchayat Panchnama may be considered as evidence but is not conclusive proof of entitlement.

¶ 8–10

The Court also referred to *Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan*, (1997) 11 SCC 121, on the State’s constitutional duty concerning shelter and the circumstances of encroachment, and to *Chameli Singh v. State of U.P.*, (1996) 2 SCC 549, as cited in *In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India*, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1227, on the content of the right to shelter.

¶ 13–14

04Reasoning

The Court held that the petitioners’ assertions of long possession, residence, and landlessness did not establish an entitlement to patta; their eligibility had to be determined under the statutory framework, and the Panchnama could be placed before the competent authorities as supporting evidence but was not conclusive.

¶ 10–12

The Court considered that the petitioners had not completed the procedure before the authorities empowered under the 2006 Act and therefore directed them to pursue their claims through that process, without deciding their merits.

¶ 10–12, 15–17

Given the pending eviction proceedings and the petitioners’ asserted residence with their families, the Court restrained coercive eviction and demolition pending determination of their claims, while clarifying that the restraint conferred no right or interest in the land.

¶ 10–12, 15–17