R.K.Agrawal - (1.) -This writ petition has been filed by Bhairao Ram (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) seeking following reliefs : (1) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned ex parte order dated 3.6.2002 passed by respondent No. 1 (Annexure-16). (2) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring the entire proceedings conducted by respondent No. 1 in passing the impugned order dated 3.6.2002 as illegal, unconstitutional and void. (3) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents not to restrain the petitioner in pursuance of impugned order/judgment passed on 3.6.2002 from his right of excavation of minor mineral on the basis of lease deed executed on 12.3.2001, which remained operative upto 29.6.2002, the date of passing the order by District Magistrate/Mines Officer, Sonebhadra in furtherance of impugned order pertaining to land of plot No. 246/1 area 10 acres situated at village Gurdah, pargana-Agori, Tehsil Robertsganj, district Sonebhadra. (4) issue any other suitable order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the present circumstances of the case. (5) to award the costs of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.
(2.) SINCE the counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged inter se parties, with the agreement of the learned counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition is being heard and decided on merit finally at the stage of admission itself in accordance with the Rules of the Court. Briefly stated, facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the State Government had issued a Notification on 9.4.1969 purported to be under Section 4 (1) (a) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) that it had been decided to constitute the land mentioned in the Schedule to be reserved forest. It included plot No. 716 situated in village Gurdah, Pargana-Agori, Tehsil Robertsganj, district Sonebhadra, having area of 485 bighas and 15 biswas. It also appointed Shri Balwant Ram, Deputy Collector, Mirzapur, as authorised Settlement Officer under the provisions of Clause (c) of Section 4 (1) of the Act. It appears that Hon'ble Supreme Court in Public Interest Litigation filed by Banwasi Sewa Ashram, directed the appointment of five Additional District Judges to work in exercise of appellate power under Section 17 of the Forest Act and to decide the matter as to whether the area is excluded under Section 4 read with Section 20 of the Act. The judgment and order of Hon'ble Supreme Court is in (1986) 4 SCC 753 and relevant direction thereof is as follows : "(2) In regard to the lands notified under Section 4 of the Act, even where no claim has been filed within the time specified in the notification as required under Section 6 (c) of the Act, such claims shall be allowed to be filed and dealt with in the manner detailed below : (I) Within six weeks from December, 1986, demar-cating pillars shall be raised by the Forest Officers of the State Government identi-fy-ing 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 published by beat of drums in all villages and surrounding areas concerned. Copies of notices 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 num-ber 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 de-cide 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 January 15, 1987. Within three months therefrom claims as contemplated under Section 6 (c) shall be received as provided by the Statute. (II) Adequate number of record officers shall be appointed by December 31, 1986. There shall also be five experienced Additional District Judges, one each to be located at Dudhi, Muirpur, Kirbil of Dudhi Tahsil and Robertsganj and Tilbudwa of Robertsganj Tehsil. Each of these Additional District Judges who will be spared by the High Court of Allahabad, would have his establishment at one of the places indicated and the State shall provide the requisite number of assistants and other employees for their efficient functioning. The learned Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court is requested to make the services of five experienced Additional District Judges available for the purpose by December 15, 1986, so that these officers may be posted at their respective stations by January 1, 1987. Each of these Additional District Judges would be entitled to 30 per cent of the salary as allowance during the period of their work. Each Additional District Judge would work at such of the five notified places that would be fixed by the District Judge of Mirzapur before December 20, 1986. These Additional District Judges would exercise powers of the Appellate Authority as provided under Section 17 of the Act. (III) After the Forest Settlement Officer had done the needful under the provisions of the Act, the findings with the requisite papers shall be placed before the Additional District Judge of the area even though no appeal is filed and the same shall be scrutinised as if an appeal has been taken against the order of the authority and the order of the Additional District Judge passed therein shall be taken to be the order contemplated under the Act. (3) When the Appellate Authority finds that the claim is admissible the State Government shall (and it is agreed before us) honour the said decision and proceed to implement the same. Status quo in regard to possession in respect of lands covered by the notification under Section 4 shall continue as at present until the determination by the appellate authority and no notification under Section 20 of the Act shall be made in regard to these lands until such appellate decision has been made."
(3.) IT may be mentioned here that under Section 17 of the Act, appeal lies from order passed by the Forest Settlement Officer. In the State of U. P., appeal lies to the District Judge, which includes Additional District Judge. IT appears that pursuant to the direction given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as mentioned above, objection was filed by one Mahendra Singh and Rajendra Singh, claiming bhumidhari right over an area of 26 bighas and 8 biswas in plot No. 246/1. The Forest Settlement Officer, vide order dated 20.6.1991, held that the possession of Mahendra Singh, Rajendra Singh over 26 bighas and 8 biswas of land is from before 1385 fasli and accordingly, agricultural operations were being done. IT is also far from forest but since it forms part of the river bed, therefore, bhumidhari rights cannot be given and their names be recorded as asami, category III. In respect of rest of the land, he held that it is not legally justified in proposing it to be reserved forest area. IT appears that the number of the plot was changed from 716 to 246. Mahendra Singh and the State of U. P. challenged the aforesaid order by filing appeal which was registered as Appeal No. 7330 of 1991 before the Additional District Judge. The Additional District Judge vide order dated 27.2.1992 allowed the appeal filed by Mahendra Singh and Rajendra Singh and declared them to be bhumidhars. The Divisional Forest Officer, filed a review application before the Additional District Judge, seeking review of the order dated 27.2.1992 which was rejected by the Additional District Judge, vide order dated 9.5.1994. IT appears that Mahendra Singh filed an application seeking recall of the order dated 9.5.1994 on which objection was filed by the Divisional Forest Officer. However, the Divisional Forest Officer also prayed for recall of the order dated 9.5.1994. The Additional District Judge, vide order dated 30.1.1999 recalled the order dated 9.5.1994 and restored the Review Application No. 2810 of 1992 to its original number. Thereafter, the review application has been allowed vide order dated 3.6.2002 and the objection of the Divisional Forest Officer has been upheld and the entire area have been held to be covered under the proposed declaration of reserved forest area under the notification dated 9.4.1969. It may be mentioned here that all the parties were permitted to file review under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 10.5.1991 and 4.10.1993. It appears that the District Magistrate, Sonebhadra executed lease deed on 2.3.2001 permitting the petitioner to excavate the sands from the plot No. 246/1 to the extent of area of 10 acres for a period of 3 years. However, after the review application filed by the Divisional Forest Officer has been allowed, the petitioner has been restrained from excavating sands.;