Statutory appellate authorities under Forest Rights Act must decide pending appeals within a reasonable period.

The forty petitioners, claiming to be forest dwellers from Scheduled Tribe communities (Dhurwa and Bhatra castes), applied for recognition of forest land rights (patta) under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

Their claims were rejected by the Gram Sabha on 27.02.2024.

Aggrieved by this rejection, the petitioners preferred a statutory appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) / Sub-Divisional Level Committee on the same day.

Despite the passage of time and repeated representations, the appeal remained pending without consideration.

The petitioners approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus for the expeditious disposal of their appeal.

1. Whether the inaction of the Appellate Authority in failing to decide a statutory appeal under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, within a reasonable time constitutes a violation of the right to speedy justice.

2. Whether a direction should be issued to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) to dispose of the pending appeal in a time-bound manner.

The Court applied the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, and the Rules framed thereunder, which mandate competent authorities to process and decide appeals regarding land rights.

It further relied on the constitutional principle enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which encompasses the right to speedy justice as a fundamental right.

The Court recognized that statutory authorities are under a legal obligation to decide proceedings within a "reasonable period".

The Court observed that it was undisputed that the petitioners’ appeal had been pending since 27.02.2024.

The Court reasoned that the Forest Rights Act and its Rules cast a specific duty upon the Sub-Divisional Level Committee to resolve disputes effectively.

Keeping a statutory appeal pending indefinitely without justification defeats the legislative intent of the Act and amounts to a denial of an effective remedy to forest dwellers.

Since the State counsel expressed no objection to a direction for disposal, the Court determined that judicial intervention was necessary to ensure the petitioners' statutory rights were not rendered illusory by administrative delay.

The Court ordered the disposal to be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 60 days from the receipt of the order, ensuring a due opportunity of hearing for the petitioners.

The Court clarified that it expressed no opinion on the actual merits of the forest rights claim.

No order as to costs was made.