1 - Dayaram Netam S/o Dulsingh Netam Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Daldali v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 2
Case Details
1 Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2025:CGHC:15233 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4304 of 2022 1 - Dayaram Netam S/o Dulsingh Netam Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Daldali (A), Nagri, Post- Dongardula, Tahsil- Nagri, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer (R), Nagri District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Tahsildar Nagri District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Divisional Forest Officer, Dhamtari District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Range Officer (Forest) Nagri District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 2 6 - Assistant Director, Fisheries Dhamtari District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Gram Panchayat Dongardula Through Sarpanch, Fuleshwari Netam, W/o Budharu Ram Netam, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Behdapara, Gram Panchayat Dongardula, Tahsil Nagri, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Jai Sheetla Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samuh Chanchanwahi (Dongardula) Through Geeta Bai W/o Nanduram Yadav, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Chachanwahi, Dongardula, Tahsil Nagri, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 9 - Station House Officer, Police Station Nagri District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. 10 - Superintendent Of Police, Dhamtari District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. G.A. For Respondent No. 7 : Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate. 3 For Respondent No. 8 : Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad 01/04/2025 Order on Board 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
Decision
allow the writ petition and quash the impugned order dated 19.03.2020 and agreement dated 01.04.2020 (Annexure P/1) executed in between the respondent no. 7 and 8 which relates to pond Chachanwahi bandha talab, khasra no. 945, rakba 0.510. 10.3 That, the respondent may also be directed to take appropriate action against the respondent no. 6 to 8 who have illegally allot the pond which has been situated in forest land that is in koop no. 295 on the basis of some forged and fabricated panchsala khasra, in the interest of justice. 10.4 Any other relief, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Facts of the case, is that vide order dated 19.03.2020 passed by 4 respondent No. 6 in respect of agreement between respondent No. 7 and respondent No. 8 for fisheries activity for a period of 10 years which has been based on the illegal proposal submitted by respondent No. 7 for doing the fishery activities upon situated in Khasra No. 945, inspite of the fact that upon the Khasra No. 945 no any pond or dam have been situated, even contrary to the procedure which has been ment for fishery activity by the State Government contrary to directive /procedure 11.2 the Gram Panchayat has made a proposal and respondent No. 6 without follow the procedure which has been mentioned in 14.1 and 14.2 and when the material produced before the authority concerned, the said pond is situated in the forest region 295 which has been handed over to the petitioner by the forest officer, in which the said allotment for 10 years fishery activity has been passed contrary to relevant provision of law. The respondent No. 6 has informed the Sub Divisional Officer (R) there is no possibility for setting-aside the agreement for fishery activity and accordingly respondent No. 6 indulged with illegal activity without perusing the directive / procedure prescribed under the law, though the order for 10 years lease agreement between respondent No. 7 and respondent No. 8 passed by the respondent No. 6 is not at all sustainable in the eye of law. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has 5 enclosed the revenue records and the map obtained online showing that Khasra No. 945 is a barren land. There is no pond, dam or any water body over it. He further submits that the water body which is created in the forest area (stop dam) is for purpose of drinking water for animals situated at Koop No. 295. He further submits that respondent No. 6 without gone through the relevant directive/procedure without found that the aforesaid pond is not mark for fishery activities even without look into fact that the Gram Panchayat, Dongardula is having no any authority and jurisdiction to pass a proposal for allotment the pond for fishery activity only on the basis of forged /fabricated Panchsala Khasra which has not sealed and signed by the Revenue Officer passed the impugned order and an agreement deed has been executed between respondent No. 7 and respondent No. 8 which is contrary to the procedure 11.1 & 11.2 and 14.1 & 14.2 of the Machhuwa Niti Kriyanwan Hetu directive/ procedure. He further submits that the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) has collected ample material which indicate the aforesaid allotment has wrongly been passed, in fact the land in question is the forest land situated in Koop No. 295 and that is not a part of Khasra No. 945, because over the Khasra No. 945 there is no any pond but on the basis of forged/ fabricated document, respondent No. 6 6 has committed mistake and pass the order for allotment of lease for a period of 10 years. He further submits that the Forest Officer have enquired the matter and submitted the report before the Sub Divisional Officer with a prayer to cancel the order dated 19.03.2020 and subsequent agreement dated 01.04.2020 but the respondents have not passed the order for cancelling the allotment of lease for a period of 10 years. Hence, this petition deserves to be allowed. 4. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents opposes the same. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. In light of additional affidavit dated 15.07.2024 filed by respondent No. 4 in compliance of order dated 21.06.2024, it is apparent that pond in question belongs to Forest Department. Paragraph No. 4 reads as under:- “That on 21.06.2024 the Hon'ble Court has directed the State to file an Additional Affidavit for the reason that the such land falls under the Forest Department and the Forest Department Official can properly ascertain the disputed land in question. However, the official concern contended that the Pond which was given for Fishery (Pisiculture) right to the Respondent No. 8 falls within the reserve forest 7 (R.F.) land to ascertain the same certified map is being annexed herewith as Annexure D/1, which clearly reflect that the Pond falls in Compartment No. 295 which is a reserve forest land.” 7. There is no confusion at all and it is apparently clear that respondent No. 7- Gram Panchayat, Dongardula is not having any right to grant pond in question to respondent No. 8- Jai Sheetla Mahila Swa- Sahayata Samuh, Chanchanwahi (Dongardula) and the lease which has been granted vide order dated 19.03.2020 issued by Deputy Director, Firsheries, Dhamtari by which he has approved the proposal of respondent No. 7- Gram Panchayat, Dongardula vide resolution dated 08/ 06.09.2018 while granting the reserve water/ pond constructed over Khasra No. 945 area 0.510 to respondent No. 8- Jai Sheetla Mahila Swa- Sahayata Samuh, Chanchanwahi (Dongardula) on an annual lease of Rs. 1500/- is per se illegal and the authorities are not entitled to grant such a lease, it is a forest land, the pond has been constructed over reserve forest land and no one except forest authorities are required to pass orders after taking due permission of the concerned authorities i.e. Union of India, State Authorities and concerned Environment Board. 8. As such the relief sought by the petitioner for quashment of 8 impugned order dated 19.03.2020 and agreement dated 01.04.2020 in respect of pond Chachanwahi Bandha Talab, Khasra No. 945 area 0.510 are hereby quashed. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby allowed. 10. The State authorities are directed to take immediate action to vacate the pond/ land from the respondent No. 8- Jai Sheetla Mahila Swa- Sahayata Samuh, Chanchanwahi (Dongardula) with immediate effect. 11. The said compliance order be sent to the Registrar General of this Registry for further action. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat