Himachal Pradesh High Court Directs State To Compensate Nonagenarian Tribal For Land "Illegally" Acquired By Forest Dept
Directing the State to pay market value compensation to a nonagenarian tribal under the Land Acquisition Act 1894, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has said that the State Forest department cannot deprive him of compensation just because he did not keep copies of the complaints he filed in the past against the Forest Department's illegal use of his land."The petitioner being an innocent...
Directing the State to pay market value compensation to a nonagenarian tribal under the Land Acquisition Act 1894, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has said that the State Forest department cannot deprive him of compensation just because he did not keep copies of the complaints he filed in the past against the Forest Department's illegal use of his land.
"The petitioner being an innocent tribal aged 94 years probably did not retain the representations given by him in the past opposing use of this land by the Forest Department, but the Forest Department cannot take advantage of the same particularly when the issue is being agitated, according to the petitioner, from the time such construction was made on his land and when at his instance a demarcation was done on 26.02.2009", a bench of Chief Justice MS Ramachandra Rao and Justice Ajay Mohan Goel observed.
The court was hearing a writ petition challenging the forest department’s action of acquiring nautor land (wasteland outside protected areas that government can use) at Kinnaur district’s Akpa village. Petitioner claimed that he was granted Nautor (traditional land rights) land in 1955, part of which the Forest Department encroached upon during the construction of officers' quarters.
The State contested the claim stating that the Petitioner did not cultivate the land within the required timeframe and that he never objected to the construction by the Forest Department.
Adjudicating upon the matter the bench noted that the grant of nautor (traditional land rights) was based on the Nautor Rules, and due to the unavailability of old revenue records, there was a lack of evidence to prove that the petitioner had given consent to the Forest Department for utilizing his land.
"In the absence of any material to show that the land was resumed by the Government on the ground of non-cultivation of the same, it has to be held that the Forest Department acted illegally, arbitrarily and in violation of Article 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India in utilizing the land given to the petitioner without paying any market value compensation for the same", the bench added.
Emphasising that even though the right to property is not a fundamental right, the court said that it is protected under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. The government has the power to acquire private property for public purposes but must provide just compensation to the affected individuals, however in this case, since no compensation was paid to Lal, the Forest Department's actions are deemed unconstitutional, the bench maintained.
Having regard to the fact that the said extent of land had already been put to use by the State and restoring the said land to the petitioner may not be appropriate in public interest the court directed the respondents to pay market value compensation to the petitioner under the Land Acquisition Act,1894 treating the land as having been acquired by the State on 1.1.1993.
The State has also been directed to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner within 4 weeks.
Case Title: Krishan Lal Vs State of H.P
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 49