The Chhattisgarh High Court has reinforced the state’s obligation to decide pending applications for Forest Rights Pattas without undue delay, emphasizing that prolonged inaction violates the principles of natural justice and denies marginalized communities their statutory rights. This order provides critical procedural clarity for petitioners under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, Laxman S/o Anath, a resident of Village Kandari in Balrampur-Ramanujganj district, Chhattisgarh, claims continuous occupation and cultivation of land in Compartment No. P-3172 for over 40 to 50 years. He asserts that he and his family have built a permanent/semi-permanent residence on the land using personal resources and have been recognized by various government agencies through the provision of essential civic amenities.
Key Facts
- The petitioner has resided on the disputed land since at least the 1970s.
- Government authorities have provided him with a borewell for water, electricity connection, ration cards, and a toilet constructed under the Swachh Bharat Mission.
- On 08.09.2025, the petitioner submitted an application (Annexure-P/2) to the Collector, Balrampur, seeking grant of a Forest Rights Patta under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
- The application remains pending without any decision or response from the competent authority.
- On 12.02.2026, the Forest Range Officer (Respondent No. 6) issued a notice directing the petitioner to vacate the land, citing unauthorized occupation.
- A prior notice dated 08.07.2025 was also issued by the Forest Department, though its contents are not detailed in the judgment.
Procedural History
- 08.09.2025: Petitioner files application for Forest Rights Patta with the Collector, Balrampur.
- 08.07.2025: First notice issued by Forest Department directing eviction.
- 12.02.2026: Second notice issued by Forest Range Officer reiterating eviction direction.
- 2026: Writ Petition No. 996 of 2026 filed before the High Court of Chhattisgarh under Article 226.
- 18.03.2026: Hearing before Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi.
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought:
- Quashing of the eviction notices dated 08.07.2025 and 12.02.2026.
- Direction to the competent authority to decide his pending Forest Rights Patta application within a stipulated time.
- Interim protection from coercive eviction until final decision.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether the state can indefinitely delay deciding a Forest Rights Patta application under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, while simultaneously issuing eviction notices, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and statutory obligations.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the prolonged inaction on the 08.09.2025 application constitutes administrative arbitrariness and denial of substantive rights under the Forest Rights Act. He emphasized that the petitioner’s possession predates the Act and is corroborated by state-provided amenities, which amount to de facto recognition. The issuance of eviction notices without adjudicating the pending application, he contended, is violative of audi alteram partem and amounts to punitive action without due process.
For the Respondent
The State counsel conceded that the application remains pending and submitted that it would be decided in accordance with law, without contesting the petitioner’s claim of long-standing occupation or the procedural irregularity.
The Court's Analysis
The Court declined to adjudicate the merits of the Forest Rights claim at this stage, noting that the petitioner’s application was still sub judice before the Collector. However, it emphasized that the state’s failure to decide the application for over six months, while simultaneously threatening eviction, created a situation of legal uncertainty and potential rights violation.
"The petitioner has been in possession for decades and has been extended civic amenities by the State. To issue eviction notices without deciding the pending application is to act in a manner inconsistent with the spirit of the Forest Rights Act and the principles of natural justice."
The Court observed that the Forest Rights Act mandates a fair, transparent, and time-bound process for recognition of rights. Indefinite delay in deciding applications, particularly where the claimant has been in continuous possession and has received state recognition, cannot be countenanced. The Court further noted that the issuance of coercive notices during pendency of the application effectively nullifies the statutory remedy.
The Court held that while it could not grant the Patta itself, it had the power under Article 226 to direct the competent authority to perform its statutory duty within a reasonable time.
The Verdict
The petitioner succeeded. The Court directed the Collector, Balrampur (Respondent No. 3), to decide the petitioner’s application dated 08.09.2025 for the grant of a Forest Rights Patta expeditiously, preferably within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner was directed to submit a copy of this order to the Collector within 15 days. Until the decision is rendered, no coercive steps, including eviction, shall be taken against the petitioner.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Administrative Delay Cannot Justify Eviction
- Practitioners representing forest-dwelling communities must now cite this order to challenge eviction notices issued while Forest Rights applications remain pending.
- Any notice to vacate land without first deciding a valid application under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, is procedurally invalid.
Statutory Duty Is Non-Discretionary
- The Collector’s obligation under the Forest Rights Act to decide applications is not discretionary but mandatory.
- Delays beyond 60 days, absent exceptional circumstances, will now be viewed as a violation of statutory duty and may attract writ intervention.
Recognition Through Amenities Is Relevant
- Provision of ration cards, electricity, borewells, and sanitation facilities by the state can be used as evidence of de facto recognition of possession, strengthening claims under Section 2(b) and Section 3(1)(a) of the Forest Rights Act.
- Such recognition cannot be ignored when evaluating claims of traditional occupation.
Procedural Fairness Is Paramount
- The principle of audi alteram partem applies even in administrative proceedings under the Forest Rights Act.
- Petitioners must be given a fair opportunity to present their case before any adverse action is initiated.
Actionable Takeaways for Practitioners
- File writ petitions under Article 226 if Forest Rights applications remain pending beyond 60 days.
- Attach proof of state-provided amenities as evidence of possession and recognition.
- Seek interim protection from eviction as a matter of right during pendency.
- Cite this judgment to oppose arbitrary notices issued by Forest Department officials.
