- (1.) In WP(C) No. 3362 of 2009, petitioners being the employees of Electro Steel Integrated Ltd. ( the Company for short) have prayed for quashing the entire proceedings initiated against them under Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act (BPLE Act for short) being B.P.L.E. Case No. 2 to 11 of 2009-2010, pending in the court of Collector cum Divisional Forest Officer, Bokaro Forest Division, including the orders passed therein restraining them and the Company from carrying on non-forestry work in the forest area in Plot Nos. 1159, 1120 and 1389. WP(C) No. 2515 of 2009 has been filed by the petitioner company for restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the lands in question, purchased by the company, in any manner.
(2.) As common questions are involved in both the writ petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this order.
(3.) Submissions on behalf of the petitioners are as follows: (i) That the said proceedings under BPLE Act, being summary in nature, the disputed questions of right, title, interest and possession, cannot be decided, specially when the appeal arising out of suit, preferred by the Forest Department, involving similar questions, is pending. That a suit being Title Suit No. 25 of 1996 was instituted in the Court of Sub Judge-II, Bokaro by the plaintiffs-Haripad Mahto, Kailashpati Mehta, Sumitra Bala Devi, sons and wife of late Raghunath Mehta of village Bhagaband against the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar; the Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Bihar; the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro; the Divisional Forest Officer, Dhanbad; and the Ranger, Chas Range Forest Department, Chas, Bokaro; for declaration of permanent occupancy raiyati right and confirmation of possession etc. of the plaintiffs in the schedule-A and B lands. Schedule-A consisted of 8.50 acres of land in plot No. 1159, 3.05 acres in plot No. 1389 5.13 acres in plot No. 1321, and 1.00 acre in plot No. 1120, in Bhagaband Mauza. That the respondents-Forest Department contested the suit. The following issues were framed: (i) Is the suit maintainable in the present form ? (ii) Is there any cause of action for the suit? (iii) Is the suit barred by the principle of waiver, estoppel and acquiescence ? (iv) Is the deed of settlement of the suit land in accordance with law ? (v) Is the suit land reclaimed into paddy producing khet by the plaintiffs? (vi) Is the entire area of each suit plot acquired by the Bihar Forest ? (vii) Is the plaintiff entitled for the reliefs prayed in the suit? (viii) Is the plaintiff entitled to any other relief or reliefs. That issue Nos. 4 and 5 were decided in affirmative. Regarding issue No. 6, it was inter alia held that claims of the defendants that the suit lands have been declared to be the protected forests is mere myth and it remains unproved as yet, and that the claim of the raiyats due to non-enquiry under Section 29(3) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 has not been extinguished as yet. It was further held that the plaintiffs are in peaceful uninterrupted continuous possession of the suit land since 1940-42 when the Bihar Private Forest Act was not in existence and therefore the plaintiff acquired indefeasible right much less raiyati right over the lands; by their continuous possession of 12/30 years; and that the plaintiffs have become occupancy right of the suit land under the provisions of CNT Act, who cannot be ejected unless and until a decree of ejectment is executed as provided under Section 22 of the CNT Act. That against such judgment and decree an appeal being Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007 was preferred in the court of District Judge, Bokaro, by the Divisional Forest Officer, Dhanbad, and the Range Officer, Chas and the same is pending. That the initiation of the impugned proceedings is illegal, arbitrary and malafide. Reliance was placed on Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao, 1982 AIR(SC) 1081 ;, Navchetan Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand, 2009 AIR(Jhar) 332;, Haranganj Grih Nirman Sahyog Samiti v. State of Jharkhand, 2009 1 JLJR 126;, Kamal Kumar Singhania v. State of Jharkhand, 2004 3 JCR 89; Manohar Lal Jain v. State of Jhakhand, 2003 2 JCR 701;, Nagendra Mistry v. State of Bihar, 2000 1 PLJR 209 and, Bharat Singh v. The State of Jharkhand,2009 2 JLJR 393. (ii) That after the notification dated 24.5.1958 was issued under Section 29 of the Indian Forest Act, 1972, it was necessary to issue notification after holding enquiry and survey, as contemplated under Section 29 (3) of the Act extinguishing the rights of the persons concerned, but no such notification was issued and therefore the said notification dated 24.5.1958 cannot be relied by the respondents for claiming that the lands in question are forest land and for initiating the impugned proceedings. That when the Forest Department could not produce notification under Section 29(3) they are claiming that the lands have been declared "Private Forest". That even from the notification declaring private forest it will appear that the extent of plots declared as private forest is not mentioned and moreover plot Nos. 1389 and 1321 are not there at all. That the raiyati-agricultural lands in question were purchased by the Company under registered sale deeds as there was delay in acquisition of land through Government. The right, title and interest of the vendors of the Company and their predecessors did not vest in the Government and were not extinguished by the process of law. State of Bihar v. Lt. Col. K.S.R. Swami, 1966 AIR(SC) 1847 was relied. (iii) The entire area in question has been surveyed in the year 1973-74 by Survey of India using the latest techniques and from such survey map, it will appear that no part of the area, over which the construction work of the Company is going on, contains forest area or private protected forest. (iv) The principles of sustainable development should be kept in mind. Establishing the Industry and preservation of Forest, both are important. NEERI (National Environment Engineering Research Institute), a premier and leading environmental study Institute of India, after conducting extensive environment study for radius of 10 Kilometers of plant area, has given approval. The Industry will earn revenue and will generate lot of direct and indirect employment. The Company has planned development of a modern township and has undertaken 1,50,000 trees plantation programme.;