Prima Facie Forest Officials Want Tribal Near Tadoba Tiger Reserve Evicted Without Following Due Process: Bombay High Court

Observing that prima facie officials of the forest department wanted to evict a tribal living on the borders of the famous Tadoba Tiger Reserve in Maharashtra without following due process, the Bombay High Court rejected a Civil Revision Application filed by the State.Justice MS Jawalkar noted that without giving the tribal a hearing, his claim to four hectares of land was rejected and the order wasn’t even communicated to him. “…it is expected that Tribals have to be given an opportunity to adduce the evidence and reasoned orders to be passed…In the present matter, prima facie, it appears that, without following due process, the defendants want to evict the plaintiff from the land which is in his possession since long,” the bench observed. The court was seized with a Civil Revision Application filed by the Assistant Conservator of Forest under Order VII, Rule 11(d) of CPC seeking dismissal of a suit filed by the tribal.They claimed that under Section 26(5) of the Indian Forest Act no civil court would have jurisdiction if forest officials evict or demolish construction under the Act. Therefore, the tribal’s suit wasn’t maintainable. In his suit Bhante Gyanjoti Thero had sought a declaration and permanent injunction. He claimed that he and the public trust of which he is the president occupied 4 hectares of forest land since 1976. He filed a claim seeking rights to live there after the Ministry of Law and Justice enacted the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, in 2006 (Dwellers Act). Even as his claim was pending, he filed another claim before the Forest Rights Committee in 2022. Just 13 days later eviction proceedings were initiated against him and he filed the suit. The forest department sought dismissal of the suit and approached the High Court after the Civil Court refused relief.Countering the argument in the High Court, Advocate AA Dhawas for the tribal man cited a government resolution barring removal of encroachment in a claim pending before the District Level Committee. At the outset the court observed that Section 26(1-A) of the IFA (Indian Forest Act) wasn’t applicable to forest dwellers whose claims were pending. “There is no dispute that Forest Officers are empowered under Section 26(1-A)(a) of the Forest Act to evict the person from reserved forest, however, their powers are subject to the rights conferred under the Dwellers Act in respect of Tribals or Traditional Forest Dwellers. If there is any claim pending in that regard, till decision of the same as per direction of State itself, no eviction can be effected,” the bench observed. The court further noted that while the forest department states that the tribal’s claim was rejected way back in 2015, there was nothing to show proof of that. If there is no communication to the concerned person whose claims are under Traditional Forest Dwellers Act, he can’t agitate his claim before Superior Authorities, the court noted. “The defendants may be right in submitting that the plaintiff (tribal) cannot be treated as a Traditional Forest Dwellers, however, there has to be adjudication on that issue and the same is required to be communicated to the plaintiff so that the plaintiff can take an appropriate steps,” the court said while upholding the trial court’s order and rejecting the application.Case Title: Assistant Conservator of Forest & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 204Click Here To Read/Download Order

Prima Facie Forest Officials Want Tribal Near Tadoba Tiger Reserve Evicted Without Following Due Process: Bombay High Court

Sharmeen Hakim

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sharmeen Hakim

Prima Facie Forest Officials Want Tribal Near Tadoba Tiger Reserve Evicted Without Following Due Process: Bombay High Court

Sharmeen Hakim

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sharmeen Hakim

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers