Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Madan Lal Srivastava for the petitioners and Sri Vishnu Pratap, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
(2.) By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 31st May, 2003 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Anpara allowing the review application filed by the Forest Department of the State of U.P. and directing for including the plots in question in notification under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. Another order challenged by the petitioners is the order dated 30th June, 2007 passed by the District Magistrate, Sonebhadra informing that applications of the petitioners for grant of mining leases cannot be considered since in view of the order of Additional District & Sessions Judge dated 31st May, 2003 the land in question has been treated as reserved forest and is proposed to be declared as reserved forest under Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act. A writ of mandamus has also been sought directing respondents No. 3 and 4 to decide the applications of the petitioners for grant of mining leases.
(3.) Facts giving rise to this writ petition, briefly noted, are; the State Government issued notification under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act (hereinafter referred to as the Forest Act) notifying that it has been decided to constitute the land mentioned in the notification as reserved forest. The land included large number of plots situate in Gram Billi Markundi, Tahsil Robertsganj, district Sonebhadra (earlier district Mirzapur). Various objections were filed before the Forest Settlement Officer by different persons claiming different rights, which also included the claim of certain persons that they have been granted mining permits/leases, hence the land be excluded from the reserved forest. The Forest Settlement Officer passed orders allowing various objections, against which matter was taken in appeal before the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Anpara. Certain objections had also been rejected by the Forest Settlement Officer. The appeals were decided by Additional District & Sessions Judge. Various review applications were filed by the Forest Department including certain persons. The review applications were decided by order dated 31st May, 2003 by the Additional District & Sessions Judge. The appellate authority by the said order allowed the review applications, set-aside the orders in the appeal and held that the land in question was to be included in the notification under Section 4 of the Forest Act. The review applications filed by certain individuals were also rejected. Some of the petitioners had filed objections on the basis of the mining leases/permits granted in their favour for limited period. The Additional District Judge allowed the review applications and held that those persons, who were granted mining leases/mining permits cannot claim any bhumidhari right nor they can claim any right in view of the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The District Magistrate vide order dated 30th June, 2007 informed the petitioners that the applications for grant of 10 years' mining leases cannot be considered in view of the order of Additional District & Sessions Judge dated 31st May, 2003 taking the view that the land is to be included in the notification under Section 4 of the Forest Act and is proposed for issuance of notification under Section 20 of the Forest Act.;