IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.27494/2016 (GM – FOR) BETWEEN:
M/S. IBC SARGOD PLANTATIONS, TOWER ‘B’ 9TH FLOOR, DIAMOND DISTRICT, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 008. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR.ZIAULLA SHERIFF. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.SURAJ PATIL, ADV. (ABSENT)) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF FORESTS, M.S.BUILDING, 4TH FLOOR, NEAR VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001. KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.
2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, CHIKMAGALUR RANGE, CHIKMAGALUR – 577 101.
3. THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, KOPPA SUB – DIVISION, CHIKMAGALUR – 577 126.
4. THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER, CHIKKAGRAHARA ZONE, CHIKMAGALUR – 577 101. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIJAY KUMAR A PATIL, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE R2 DATED 29.01.2016 IN APPEAL NO.11/2014-15 WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER None for the petitioner.
Sri Vijay Kumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. In this petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 29.01.2016 passed by respondent No.2. The petitioner also seeks quashment of eviction notice dated 10.02.2016 issued by respondent No.4.
3. The facts giving rise to filing of the writ petition briefly stated are that:
The petitioner claims to be a plantation company owned by India Builders Corporation (IBC) Group. It is averred in the writ petition that in the year 2000, the petitioner acquired Sargod Plantations situated at Chikmagalur and also acquired the property bearing Sy.Nos.285 and 260 in Karkeshwara village, N.R.Puram Taluk, Chikamagaluru District. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was in possession of the property. However, FIR was lodged against the petitioner by respondent No.4 for the offences under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 and Karnataka (Conservation) Act, 1980 on the ground that the petitioner has encroached the forest lands bearing Sy.Nos.243 and 285 of Karkeshwara village. The petitioner was served with a notice in which the petitioner replied. Thereupon, respondent No.3 by an order dated 21.08.2014 directed the petitioner to hand over vacant possession of forest lands situated in Sy.Nos.285 and 260 of Karkeshwara village and the aforesaid order has been upheld in appeal on 29.01.2016, which is under challenge in this petition.
4. I have heard learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the record.
5. The respondents have filed their objections in which inter-alia it has been averred that while conducting re-mahazar by the Range Forest Officer on 13.01.2014 and 28.05.2014 in the presence of the representative of the petitioner found that the petitioner is in illegal possession of forest lands measuring 27.10 acres in Sy.Nos.285 and 260.
After submission of the Report by the Range Forest Officer, the petitioner was called for enquiry on 26.09.2013 by respondent No.3. However, the petitioner has sought time for filing objections. But, the Range Forest Officer, Chikkagrahara, appeared and submitted Joint Survey Sketch dated 05.09.1999 conducted by the Forest Officer of Survey Unit of Koppa Division and the enquiry was postponed to 24.10.2013. The petitioner remained absent on the aforesaid date. Thereafter, a notice was issued to him to participate in the enquiry on 28.11.2013. On the aforesaid date, the counsel for the petitioner appeared and filed vakalat. Thereafter, a detailed enquiry was conducted in the presence of the advocate for the petitioner and written arguments on behalf of the petitioner were filed. However, no supportive documents were produced in support of his stand. The Assistant Conservator of Forests and Technical Assistant to Deputy Conservator of Forests, Koppa Division, Koppa, after conducting a detailed enquiry, by order dated 21.08.2014, passed an order to evict the petitioner from the lands which were illegally encroached by him. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The aforesaid order was confirmed by the appellate authority by order dated 29.01.2016.
6. Thus, both the authorities have concurrently recorded the findings of fact against the petitioner that he has encroached the forest lands. The petitioner in the enquiry which was held against him has failed to produce any material to show that he is in lawful possession of the forest lands. The aforesaid finding which by no stretch of imagination cannot be said to be perverse or based on evidence.
7. It is well settled law that this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot reappreciate the evidence and substitute its own finding in place of findings recorded by the authorities. The matter against the petitioner stands concluded by concurrent finding of fact, which do not call for any interference.
In the result, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same stands hereby dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE TL