S.U.Khan - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Inspite of sufficient service no one has appeared on behalf of respondent No. 3 - Panna Lal. Notices were issued to him through registered post with A.D. on 1.11.2008 as per office report of the said date. However, he did not engage any counsel.
(2.) THE first order challenged through this writ petition was passed by Forest Settlement Officer (F.S.O.)/Deputy Collector, Renukoot, Mirzapur in case No. 338 Panna Lal v. Forest Department. THE land in dispute is comprised in plot No. 2845 area 5 bigha situate in village Ranhaur. THE land in dispute alongwith other lands was notified under Section-4 of Forest Act 1927. Panna Lal filed objections under Section-6 of the Act claiming that he was bhoomidhar of the land in dispute hence it must be excluded from the limits of the proposed forest. His specific case was that he had acquired title on the basis of possession. THE case was decided by F.S.O. On 31.3.1989. Copy of the said judgment is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In the said judgment it is mentioned that the land in dispute was entered as jungle in the revenue records (khata No. 9). Panna Lal had claimed that he was in possession for 15 to 16 years. However, from perusal of the revenue record FSO found that his possession was only four years old. F.S.O. also noted that Panna Lal at one stage stated that his possession was 10-12 years old and at another stage he stated that possession was 15-16 years old hence his case was extremely doubtful. Accordingly, objections filed by Panna Lal were dismissed. Against the said order Panna Lal respondent No. 3 filed the appeal which was registered as Misc. Appeal No. 1385 of 1989. Additional District Jude, Pipri, Sonebhadra dismissed the appeal on 11.6.1991 holding that Panna Lal - appellant had stated that his possession was before 1385 fasli however, he could not prove that and as was mentioned in proforma-9, at the time of survey his possession was not found and land was found not capable of agriculture. Copy of the said judgment is Annexure-2 to the writ petition. In respect of forest land situate in Tehsil Dudhi and Robertsganj which were initially included in District Mirzapur and are now in District Sonebhadra Supreme Court passed several orders one of which was reported in Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of U.P., AIR 1987 SC 374. Pursuant to the directions given by the Supreme Court, Section 131 A was added in U.P. Zamandari Abolition and Land Reforms Act in the year 1987 first paragraph of which is quoted below : "131-A. Bhumidhari rights in Gaon Sabha or State Government land in certain circumstances.-Subject to the provisions of Section 132 and Section 133-A, every person in cultivator/ possession of any land, vested in a Gaon Sabha under Section 117 or belonging to the State Government, in the portion of district Mirzapur south of Kaimur range, other than the land notified under Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, before the 30th day of June, 1978, shall be deemed to have become a Bhumidhar with non-transferable rights of such land" (proviso not relevant) (30.6.1978 is last date of 1385 Fasli) It appears that Panna Lal did not pursue the matter further. However, petitioner filed application for recall of order passed by the appellate Court which was registered as Misc. Case No. 19 of 1992 and was rejected on 31.3.1992, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition). Annexure Nos.1, 2 and 3 to this writ petition have been challenged through his writ petition. In the order dated 31.3.1992 passed on the application of the petitioner appellate Court held that third party had no right to file recall or review petition. In the above authority the Supreme Court noted in para-6 that: "Admittedly there had been no survey and settlement in these Tehsils." (Tehsil Dudhi and Robertsganj) Under para 10(2) certain directions were issued. Direction -I contained in the said para is quoted below : "I. Within six weeks from 1-12-1986, demarcating pillars shall be raised by the Forest Officers of the State Government identifying the lands covered by the notification under Section 4 of the Act. The fact that a notification has been made under Section 4 of the Act and demarcating pillars have been raised in the locality to clearly identify the property subjected to the notification shall be widely publicised by beat of drums in all the villages and surrounding areas concerned. Copies of notice printed in Hindi in abundant number will be circulated through the Gram Sabhas giving reasonable specifications of the lands which are covered by the notification. Sufficient number of Inquiry Booths would be set up within the notified area so as to enable the people of the area likely to be affected by the notification to get the information as to whether their lands are affected by the notification, so as to enable them to decide whether any claim need be filed. The Gram Sabhas shall give wide publicity to the matter at their level. Demarcation, as indicated above, shall be completed by 15-1-1987. Within three months therefrom, claims as contemplated under Section 6(c) shall be received as provided by the statute."
(3.) ACCORDINGLY, it is clear that claims under Section 6 of Forest Act could be received only till 15.4.1987 by F.S.O. Petitioner did not make any claim within that time before F.S.O. In-fact petitioner did not file any claim before F.S.O. He therefore, cannot file application directly before the appellate Court in an appeal filed by some other person and that also after dismissal of the appeal. Accordingly, there is not merit in the writ petition hence it is dismissed.;