1 / 6 2026:CGHC:24452 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2737 of 2020 Ritu Som D/o Shri Birsingh Som Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Keshodar (Koylabhatta) Tehsil And District Gariaband., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector Gariaband, Collectorate Compound, Gariaband, District Gariaband Chhattisgarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer Gariaband, Tehsil And District Gariaband Chhattisgarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 4 - Divisional Forest Officer Gariyaband Division (Forest), District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Govt. Advocate Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.06.18 14:49:24 +0530 2 / 6 S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 17/06/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs : “10.1) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records form the respondent no.3 pertaining to the petitioner's application. 10.2) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs / order / direction directing the respondent no.3 to process the recommendation of the Gram Sabha in favor of the petitioner in accordance with act of 2006. 10.3) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs / order / direction quashing the impugned notice/order dated 09.10.2020 (ANNEXURE P-1) since the same is arbitrary illegal and non- sustainable in the factual matrix. 10.4) The Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs/order/direction restraining the respondent from dispossessing the petitioner form the subject land till the application of the petitioner under the Act of 2006 is not decided. 10.5) Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.6) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner belongs to scheduled tribe community and is residing in the forest area. She is in possession of land bearing compartment No.577 situated at Village- 3 / 6 Keshodar (Koylabhatta), Tehsil and District -Gariaband which is forming part of reserved forest. Petitioner after coming into force of the Scheduled Tribes and Others Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (for short “Act of 2006”) had submitted an application for grant of forest rights of the land possessed by her before the Village Panchayat according to provision of the Act of 2006, upon which, Village Panchayat has resolved and made recommendation in favour of petitioner and forwarded the claim of petitioner before the Block Level Committee. However, the Block Level Committee has rejected the claim of petitioner, aggrieved with which petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector who is head of the District Level Committee. After hearing the parties, the Collector vide order dated 13.12.2018 has allowed the appeal in favour of petitioner and has remitted back the case of petitioner to Block Level Committee for reconsideration and passing the order on the claim of petitioner in accordance with law afresh. However, till date, claim of petitioner has not been considered and decided by Block Level Committee. He also contended that in reply submitted by State on 01.07.2025 also it is mentioned that claim of petitioner is still pending consideration before the Block Level Committee. Petitioner was required to filed this petition only because during pending consideration of claim of petitioner for grant of forest rights, respondent No.4 has issued a notice (Annexure P-1) of eviction of petitioner under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court vide order dated 24.11.2020 granted interim protection to the petitioner by staying the impugned notice dated 09.10.2020 (Annexure P-1). He contended that as the petitioner is a member of scheduled tribe community and 4 / 6 residing in the forest village and is in possession of forest land and had already submitted an application for grant of forest rights under the Act of 2006 which is still pending consideration before the appropriate authority as provided under the Act of 2006, therefore, till decision on the application/claim of petitioner for grant of forest rights, impugned notice Annexure P-1 be stayed. 3. Learned counsel for the State would not oppose the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to submission of application for grant of forest rights under the Act of 2006. She however submits that according to return submitted by State it is reflecting that on the date of filing of return, claim of petitioner was still pending consideration before the Block Level Committee. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexure along with this writ petition. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner had already submitted her claim/application for grant of forest rights on the land possessed by her before the authority under the Act of 2006. The objects of enacting Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights), Act, 2006 Bill are as under: “i) it reinforces and utilises the rich conservation ethos that tribal communities have traditionally shown and cautions against any form of unsustainable or destructive practices; (ii) it lays down a simple procedure for recognition and vesting of forest right in the forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes so that right, which stand vested in forest dwelling tribal communities, become legally enforceable through 5 / 6 corrective measures in the formal reordering systems of the exclusive machinery; (iii) it provides for adequate safeguards to avoid any further encroachment on forest and seeks to involve the democratic institutions at the grassroots level in the process of recognition and vesting of forest right; (iv) it addresses the long standing and genuine felt need of granting a secure and inalienable right to those communities whose right to life depends on right to forests and thereby strengthening the entire conservation regime by giving a permanent stake to the Scheduled Tribes dwelling in the forests for generations in symbiotic relationship with the entire ecosystem.” 6. Along with the writ petition, petitioner has enclosed the proceeding of Gram Sabha wherein Gram Sabha has made recommendation for grant of forest rights to the petitioner on her application and forwarded the same to the Block Level Committee constituted under the Act of 2006. Order Annexure P-5 passed by the Collector would show that, Block Level Committee constituted under the Act of 2006 has rejected the claim of petitioner against which appeal was preferred and the Collector after hearing the parties, considering facts and circumstances of the case, set aside the order/decision of the Blok Level Committee and remitted back the claim of petitioner/proceedings before the Block Level Committee for taking decision afresh in accordance with law. 7. It is not in dispute that till filing of reply by the State on 01.07.2025, claim of petitioner/application submitted by petitioner for grant of forest rights was pending consideration before the Block Level Committee. 6 / 6 8. In the aforementioned facts of the case, as the claim/rights of petitioner to keep in possession of the land subject matter of notice Annexure P-1 is still to be decided by the competent authority under the Act of 2006, I find it appropriate to allow this writ petition. 9. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. Interim relief granted on 24.11.2020 shall continue till decision on claim of petitioner by Block Level Committee as directed by the Collector. Respondent authority is directed not to evict the petitioner from the land subject matter of notice till decision of the Block Level Committee on the claim of petitioner for grant of forest rights. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen