SHIVPRASAD Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner took out the proceedings under Section 9/11 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 objecting to the declaration of the disputed land as "reserved forest" under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The proceedings, registered in the year 2013 under Section 9/11 Indian Forest Act, 1927, registered as Misc. Case no. 1564 of 2013 (Shiv Prasad Vs Forest Department) before the Forest Settlement Officer, Obara, Sonebhadra, were rejected by order dated 28.06.2016. The petitioner carried the said order in appeal under Section 17 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, registered as Misc. Civil Appeal No. 92 of 2016 (Shiv Prasad Vs. Forest Department) before the learned Additional District Judge, Anpara at Obara, District-Sonebhadra. The appeal was dismissed by order dated 22.03.2018.

(2.) The petitioner has assailed the order dated 28.06.2016 passed by the Forest Settlement Officer, Sonebhadra as well as the order dated 22.03.2018 passed by the learned appellate court in this petition.

(3.) Sri Yogesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the authority of first instance and learned appellate court have erred in law by taking a hyper technical view in the matter of limitation where rights of most substantive nature are involved. Further, the impugned orders have misread the statute and the learned courts below acted contrary to law. He relies on the law laid down by this Court in the case of Hardayal Vs. District Judge and others,1972 ALJ 649.