Premium
This is an archive article published on March 30, 2022

Karnataka: Forest department files appeal against ‘illegal’ grant of 1,511 acres of forest land in Sakleshpura

Notably, the High Court of Karnataka in the case of E Ramakrishnappa vs State of Karnataka in 2018 has upheld the dismissal of tehsildar Ramakrishnappa for having illegally granted 134.18 acres of Srinivaspura reserve forest land in Kolar district.

Forest Rights ActThe forest lands were in the process of being declared as reserved forest.(Representational/File)

The forest department has filed an appeal before the Court of Assistant Commissioner, Sakleshpura subdivision that out of 7,938.38 acres of the Moorkannugudda notified forest area, 1,511.09 acres have been ‘illegally granted’ between 1980 and 2021. It has also claimed that the revenue department has mutated only 5,631.28 acres in the name of the forest department and 986.38 acres have been mutated as gomala (grazing land), among others.

🗞️ Subscribe Now: Get Express Premium to access the best Election reporting and analysis 🗞️

The forest lands were in the process of being declared as reserved forest.

Story continues below this ad

Hassan deputy conservator of forest N Ravindra Kumar filed the appeal dated March 25 before the assistant commissioner, Sakleshpur terming land grants made by the revenue authorities to 508 beneficiaries for coffee cultivation as illegal.

Notably, the High Court of Karnataka in the case of E Ramakrishnappa vs State of Karnataka in 2018 has upheld the dismissal of tehsildar Ramakrishnappa for having illegally granted 134.18 acres of Srinivaspura reserve forest land in Kolar district.

Taking note of the illegal grant of forest land by the revenue officers, the Karnataka government order dated August 18, 1960 stated no forest lands should be granted for cultivation without consultation of the forest department.

“The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was enacted with a view to check further deforestation which ultimately results in ecological imbalance and, therefore, the provisions made there in for the conservation of forests and for matters connected therewith, must apply to all forests irrespective of the nature of ownership of classification thereof. In view of the meaning of the word “FOREST” in the Act, it is obvious that prior approval of the Central Government is required for any non-forest activity within the area of any “FOREST”.

Story continues below this ad

“In accordance with Section 2 of the Act, all on-going activity within any forest in any state throughout the country without the prior approval of the Central Government, must cease forthwith. This order is to be operable and to be implemented notwithstanding any order at variance made or which may be made by any government or any authority including the central or any state government or any court (including high court) or tribunal,” the appeal read.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement

You May Like

Advertisement