MOHINDER PAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH FB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of the Himachal Pradesh Kutlehar Forest (Acquisition of Management) Act, 1992 (hereafter shortly, 'the Management Acquisition Act' or 'this Act'), on numerous grounds being recorded in the latter part of this judgment. Before passing of this Act, the State Government issued Notification No. Rev. D(F)7-1/90, dated 19/01/1990, under Section 3 of the Punjab Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1957 directing the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to take over management and possession of Kutlehar Jagir Forest from the petitioner with the assistance of the Collector. This Notification was assailed by the petitioner through Civil Writ Petition No. 42 of 1990 (Shri Mohinder Pal v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others). By orders of 22/01/1990 and 26/06/1990, operation of this Notification was stayed and the writ petition admitted for hearing. Since both the actions of the respondents relate to the same forest, we asked Shri B. Datta, learned senior counsel for the respondents, to spell out the stand of the respondents in this regard. The learned counsel submitted that the respondents do not depend on the Notification issued under the Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1957, impugned in Civil Writ Petition No. 42 of 1990, the same would be withdrawn in due course. The State Government solely depends upon the present Act, thus, rendering Civil Writ Petition No. 42 of 1990 infructuous. In view of this stand taken by the respondents, we dismiss Civil Writ Petition No. 42 of 1990 as infructuous and direct the State Government to withdraw the impugned Notification.

(2.) In order to understand the crucial questions involved in this case for decision, it is necessary to make mention of the essential facts of this case.

(3.) The petitioner submits that he is the descendant of the Pal Family of Kutlehar, a small principality in Kangra Hills, now, forming part of the state of Himachal Pradesh from 1/11/1966. It came into being 300-400 years ago and was ruled by his ancestors. It was divided into sixteen 'Tappas' (chunks of land), four were Jagir 'Tappas' and 12 Khalsa 'Tappas.' In four 'Jagir Tappas', land revenue to the extent of Rs. 10,000.00 was assigned to his forefathers by way of 'Jagir'. In addition to these four 'Tappas', about twenty thousand acres of land belonged to 'Bartandars' ( right-holders). It was not used for agriculture purposes. The forefathers of the petitioner had grown large number of trees over it from period before 1868 A.D. They protected and maintained these trees while 'Bartandars' were granted certain rights- right to get timber on concessional rates for their domestic requirements, the right to graze their cattle etc. Obviously, for planting and managing these trees, substantial investments were made. The forefathers of the petitioner were dealing with these trees as proprietors of the forest and it was on account of this background that as early as 1869 during the settlement operation of civil District of Kangra, Mr. James Lyall, Settlement Officer, made proposal through his letter No. 12, dated February 12, 1868 that the management of the forests in four. 'Tappas', termed as 'Jagir Tappas', be granted to the Raja of Kutlehar. The Government of Punjab approved this proposal not only in respect of four 'Jagir Tappas', but also for all the sixteen 'Tappas' - twelve Khalsa 'Tappas'. It is contained in letter No. 49, dated January 11, 1869 and since then the predecessors of the petitioner started managing the forest subject to the conditions contained in the approval.