- (1.) HEARD Sri R.C. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Goswami, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
(2.) ON 21.08.2014, this court passed the following order: "Heard Sri R.C. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the judgment and order dated 02.11.1998 passed by the Additional District Judge while considering the matter in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Banwasi Sewa Ashram Vs. State of U.P., 1987 AIR(SC) 374 The sum and substance of the argument of Sri Singh is that, earlier, after issuance of the Notification under Section 4 of the Forest Act, objections were filed by the petitioner, which were decided under Section 11(2)(i) of the Forest Act by the Forest Settlement Officer vide 13.07.1972 in his favour. He further submitted that subsequently under some misconception, the matter was reopened, however, again the same was decided in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 30.03.1988. In spite of earlier order dated 13.07.1972 not having been challenged/ set aside and having attained finality when the second order was passed on 30.03.1988, the records were forwarded to the District Judge concerned for verification as per the provision contained in the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court and the District Judge has decided the matter against the petitioner and has held the land in question to be forest land. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that once the rights of the petitioner had been decided in the earlier proceedings under Section 11(2)(i) of the Aforesaid Act vide order dated 13.07.1972, then the matter could not have been reopened nor a decision to the contrary could have been taken by the Additional District Judge. In this regard, he placed before this court a judgment of this court dated 24.02.2011 passed in Writ Petition No.37645 of 1991. Put up this case tomorrow to enable the learned counsel for the respondent to address the court. "
(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, the factual situation emerges as under: Section -4 Notification was issued in respect of the lands in question on 04.09.1970. In the earlier proceedings under Section 6 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and an order is alleged to have been passed by the Forest Settlement Officer on 13.07.1972 in favour of the petitioner herein. In the said order, a copy of which is annexed with the writ petition and which was also produced before the appellate court, the petitioner has been held to be in possession in respect of the entire land forming part of plots No.81 and 83, but, his claim in respect of plot No.84 was rejected. It was held that the petitioner was in possession from a date prior to the date of vesting, therefore, had acquired sirdari rights. Accordingly, the aforesaid plots were excluded from the forest area. Subsequently, on a petition, the Supreme Court took cognizance of the matter pertaining to the rights of the original inhabitants of the area falling south Kamoor Range, i.e. District Mirzapur in the State of U.P. and by means of judgment dated 20.11.1986, it issued the following directions: "6. INDISPUTABLY, forests are a much wanted national asset. On account of the depletion thereof ecology has been disturbed; climate has undergone a major change and rains have become scanty. These have long -term adverse effects on national economy as also on the living process. At the same time, we cannot lose sight of the fact that for industrial growth as also for provision of improved living facilities there is great demand in this country for energy such as electricity. In fact, for quite some time the entire country in general and specific parts thereof, in particular, have suffered a tremendous setback in industrial activity for want of energy. A scheme to generate electricity, therefore, is equally of national importance and cannot be deferred. Keeping all these aspects in view and after hearing learned counsel for the parties in the presence of officers of the State Government and NTPC and representatives of the Banwasi Seva Ashram, we proceed to give the following directions: 1. So far as the lands which have already been declared as reserved forest under section 20 of the Act, the same would not form part of the Writ Petition and any direction made by this Court earlier, now or in future in this case would not relate to the same. In regard to the lands declared as reserved forest, it is, however, open to the claimants to establish their rights, if any, in any other appropriate proceeding. We express no opinion about the maintainability of such claim. 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 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 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 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. II. Adequate number of record officers shall be appointed by 31st December, 1986. There shall also be five experienced Additional District Judges, one each to be located at Dudhi, Muirpur, Kirbil of Dudhi Tehsil and Robertsganj and Tilbudwa of Robersganj 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 15.12.1986 so that these officers may be posted at their respective stations by the first of January, 1987. Each of these Additional District Judges would be entitled to thirty 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 up by the District Judge of Mirzapur before 20th of December, 1986. These Additional District Judges would exercise the powers of the Appellate Authority as provided under section 17 of the Act. III. After the Forest Settlement Officer has 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 scrutinized 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. (4) Necessary assistance by way of legal aid shall be provided to the claimants or persons seeking to raise claims and for facilitating obtaining of requisite information for lodging of claims, actual lodging of claims and substantiating the same both at the original as also the appellate stage as contemplated by the claimant. Legal aid shall be extended to the claimants, without requiring compliance of the procedure laid down by the Legal Aid Board. The Legal Aid and Advice Board of Uttar Pradesh and the District Legal Aid and Advice Committee of Mirzapur shall take appropriate steps to ensure availability of such assistance at the five places indicated above. For the purpose of ensuring the provision of such legal aid, State of Uttar Pradesh has agreed to deposit a sum of rupees five lakhs with the District Legal Aid Committee headed by the District Judge of Mirzapur and has undertaken to deposit such further funds as will be necessary from time to time. It shall be open to the District Legal Aid Committee under the supervision of the State Legal Aid Board to provide legal aid either by itself or through any Social Action Groups, like the Banwasi Seva Ashram. (5) The land sought to be acquired for the Rihand Super Thermal Power Project of the NTPC shall be freed from the ban of dispossession. Such land is said to be about 153 acres for Ash Pipe Line and 1643 acres for Ash Dyke and are located in the villages of Khamariya, Mitahanai, Parbatwa, Jheelotola, Dodhar and Jarha. Possession thereof may be taken after complying with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, but such possession should be taken in the presence of one of the Commissioners who are being appointed by this order and a detailed record of the nature and extent of the land, the name of the person who is being dispossessed and the nature of enjoyment of the land and all other relevant particulars should be kept for appropriate use in future. Such records shall be duly certified by the Commissioner in whose presence possession is taken and the same should be available for use in all proceedings that may be taken subsequently. The NTPC has agreed before the Court that it shall strictly follow the policy on "facilities to be given to land oustees" as placed before the Court in the matter of lands which are subjected to acquisition for its purpose. The same shall be taken as an undertaking to the Court. (6) It is agreed that when a claim is established appropriate title deed would be issued to the claimant within a reasonable time by the appropriate authority. (7) The Court appoints the following as a Board of Commissioners to supervise the operations and oversee the implementation of the direction given: (i) Mr. P.R. Vyas Bhiman (I.A.S. retired), Executive Chairman of the State Board of Revenue, U.P. now residing at Lucknow; (ii) Dr. Vasudha Dhagamwar; (iii) A representative to be nominated by the Banwasi Seva Ashram. The Committee shall be provided by the State Government with transport facilities and the appropriate infrastructure. This should be completed before 31.12.1986. In the affidavit filed by Shri Yadav, Joint Secretary to the State Government on 07.11.1986, certain instructions of the State Government have been detailed. To the extent the instructions are not superseded by the Court's directions in to -day's order the same shall remain effective. We must express our satisfaction in regard to the co - operation shown by the parties. Mr. Gopal Subramaniam appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh has taken considerable pains to give shape to the matter. Mr. Ramamurti for the petitioner has also done considerable work in evolving the ambit of the guidelines which we have adopted. We hope that all parties concerned with the matter would exhibit the proper spirit necessary to successfully complete the assignment. We give liberty to parties to move for directions as and when necessary. The Board of Commissioners shall also be at liberty to approach this Court for directions when necessary for implementing the present arrangements. Order accordingly.";