1

BEFORE HONBLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA.
Original Application No------of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
DILLIP KUMAR PRADHAN AND ANOTHER…
APPLICANTS
VERSUS

STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS … RESPONDENTS

INDEX

Sl NO PARTICULARS PAGE
NO
1 Original Application 1-18
2 Copy of the order dated 06/04/2024 passed by Hon‟ble high 19-22
Court Of Orissa as ANNEXURE-1.
3 Copy of the letter dated 03/11/2009 as ANNEXURE-2. 23-25
4 Copy of the photographs dated 17/08/2024 as ANNEXURE-3. 26-29
5 Copy of the proceeding dated 04/04/1994 as ANNEXURE-4. 30-33
6 Certified copy of ROR of Khata no1 as ANNEXURE-5. 31-37
7 Certified copy of Hal- Sabik comparison as ANNEXURE-6. 38-40
8 Copy of the letter dated 24th October 2011 as ANNEXURE- 41-42
7.
9 Vakalatnama and authorisaton 43-44

PLACE: Bhubaneswar SANKAR PRASAD PANI

DATE: 24/08/2024 ASHUTOSH PADHY

ADVOCATE
Plot 2132/4814, NageswarTangi, Bubaneswar 751002 Cell-
9437279278,Email:sankarprasadpani@gmail.com
 2
SYNOPSIS

That the present application is being filed challenging the transfer of 54.20

Ac.(21.9360Ha) of forest land for non forest activities for establishment

of rehabilitation and resettlement colony National Aluminum Company

Ltd.(hereafter NALCO for short) in village Kosala under Chhendipada

tahasil of Angul district. That the Orissa Industrial Infrastructure

Development Corporation (hereafter IDCO for short) is transferring the

Govt. land in favor of NALCO for establishment of rehabilitation and

resettlement colony of (hereafter R&R colony for short) of NALCO in

village Kosala under Chhendipada Tahasil of Angul district. That the

applicant‟s are the inhabitant‟s of Kosala Village in Chhendipada

Tahasil, Angul District where this project is proposing for construction of

R&R colony and the villagers are concerned of the illegal diversion of

forest land by IDCO Odisha without following the process laid down

under Forest Conservation Act 1980. That from the Sabik-Hal

comparison it is seen that the area pertaining to Hal Plot

No.19,29,33,35,39,23,24,25,26,27,28,37 corresponds to Sabik Plot

No.6,9,10,12,76 under Sabik Khata No.1 of village Kosala. These plots

were "Chhota Jungle" by kisam originally and had been converted to

"Puratan Patita" on the basis of a "Kisam change" proceeding in the year

1984. In this illegal conversion and transfer of forest land a Writ petition

was filed before the Hon‟ble High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, bearing
 3
case number W.P.(C) 857 of 2024, while hearing the case on dated

06/04/2024 Hon‟ble High Court granted liberty to the petitioners to

approach Hon‟ble National Green Tribunal to adjudicate this issue.

LIST OF DATES

04/04/1984 Sub Collector/ Appellate authority quashed the order

passed by Tahasildar Chhendipada.

03/11/2009 Orissa industrial infrastructure Development Corporation

made an application to the Tahasildar Chhendipada for Lease
of Government (leasable) land measuring Ac.54.20 (21.9360
Ha.) in village Kosala under Chhendipada Tahasil for
establishment of industries (R&R Colony).

24/10/2011 Revenue Department, State Government of Odisha‟s

clarification on applicability of Forest Conservation Act
1980.

25/02/2019 Certified copy of ROR was issued

04/11/2023 Certified copy of Hal- Sabik comparison was issued

17/08/2024 Photographs taken from the land in question

 4
BEFORE HONBLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA.

(Under Section 18(1) read with Section 14(1), 15 and 20 of the National Green
Tribunal Act 2010)
Original Application No------of 2024

IN THE MATTER OF:-

1. Dillip Kumar Pradhan S/o Khira Mohan Pradhan, aged about 64

years, At-Kadalikhola po-Kosala,Dist-Angul, pin-759130

2. Sidharth Sankar Sahoo, S/o Jiten Kumar Sahoo, aged about 41

years, At-Kosala, Dist- Angul, Pin- 759130…APPLICANTS

VERSUS

1. State of Odisha represented by Additional Chief Secretary Forest

Environment and Climate Change Dept. Govt. of Odisha, At:

LokSeva Bhawan, Sachivalaya Marg, Bhubaneswar, Dist.: Khurda,

Odisha, Pin: 751001. E-mail ID : fesec.or@nic.in

2. UNION OF INDIA Through the Secretary, Ministry of Environment,

Forests and Climate Change, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jorbagh,

New Delhi - 110003; Email - mef@nic.in, secy-moef@nic.in

3. District Collector Angul, At/Po- Collectorate, Angul– 759122,

 5
email- dm-angul@nic.in

4. Tahasildar Chhendipada, At/po- Chhendipada, Odisha 759124,

Email- tah.chhendi-od@nic.in

5. Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation

(IDCO), Represented by its Managing Director, At/p-IDCO

Tower, Janpath, Bhubaneswar-751022, Email: idc.odisha@gov.in

6. Divisional Forest Officer Angul, at/Po- Amalapada, Angul, Odisha

759122, Email- dfo.angul@odisha.gov.in

7. National Aluminum Company Ltd. (NALCO), represented

through it‟s Chairman cum Managing Director, At/Po- NALCO

Bhawan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar – 751 013, Odisha, Email-

cmd@nalcoindia.co.in….Respondents.

Most Respectfully Showth :-

I. The Address of the Applicants are given above for the service of

notices of this application.

II. The Addresses of the Respondents are given above for the service of

notice of this application.

III. The Present Application Challenges the illegal transfer of forest land

in favor of IDCO, a state government agency for industrial purposes

without following the due process of Forest Conservation Act 1980.

 6
FACTS OF THE CASE

1. That the applicants are the villagers of Kosala under Chhendipada

Tahasil of Angul district, who are going to be directly affected by the

grant of lease to the Respondent No 7.

2. That the applicants prior to filing of this OA, approached the Hon‟ble

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack having the same cause of action, and

while adjudicating the matter on dated 06/04/2024 Hon‟ble High

Court granted liberty to the petitioners to approach this Hon‟ble

Tribunal for adjudication. Copy of the order dated 06/04/2024 passed

by Hon‟ble high Court Of Orissa is annexed hereunto as

ANNEXURE-1.

3. That the Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation

(hereafter IDCO for short) on dated 03/11/2009 wrote a letter to the

Tahasildar Chhendipada for Lease of Government (leasable) land

measuring Ac.54.20 (21.9360 Ha.) in village Kosala under

Chhendipada Tahasil for establishment of industries rehabilitation

and resettlement colony (R&R Colony) of NALCO .Copy of the

letter dated 03/11/2009 is annexed here unto as ANNEXURE-2.

4. It is pertinent to mention here that in the same letter it is specifically

mentioned that “It has been intimated by Additional District

Magistrate, Angul that 90% of the requisitioned area covers thick

 7
forest growth and is under the control of villagers of Kosala.” This

suggests there is a physical forest growth and the villagers have

dependency on it.

5. It is further submitted that the Land in question is contiguous to

Kosala Reserve Forest, That the forest is having various species of

flora and fauna and home to many wild life species.

6. That from the photographs dated 17/08/2024 it is quite evident that

the land in question looks like a forest and the same qualifies the

dictionary meaning of forest. In addition to that a sign board was also

placed in the land in question which states that the Cashew Plantation

+ Sal forest is being protected by the Kosala villagers. That the

google earth image of the site in question also suggests that the land

is adjacent to the Kosala Reserve Forest. Copy of the photographs

dated 17/08/2024 along with google earth image is annexed here unto

as ANNEXURE-3.

7. That the land in question is a elephants pathway and herds of

elephants use to take shelter in the land in question and also in the

adjoining Kosala Reserve Forest, so any kind of non-forest activity

will interfere in the movement of elephant.

8. It is pertinent to mention here that the villagers are protecting the

land in question along with the reserve forest and utilizing the same
 8
for various communal purposes.

BACKGROUND OF THE LAND IN QUESTION

9. That in the same sabik khata, plot no.1 having kisam Chhot Jungle

was settled by tahasildar Chhendipada in favor of some individuals

who have been encroached the land for some time, the same order of

Tahasildar was challenged by State before Sub Collector Angul and

the order of granting land right to the individuals were cancelled by

the Sub Collector/ appellate authority, by stating that that by the time

Forest Conservation Act, 1980 came into force, i.e., 25.10.80 the land

continued as forest land and hence could not be put to non-forest use

without approval of Central Government. Copy of the proceeding

dated 04/04/1994 is annexed here unto as ANNEXURE-4.

10.That the kisam of the land in question was Chhot jungle till the year

1984 and in the year 1984 in a mutation proceeding bearing case no.

612/84 kisam of the land was changed to Puratan Patita, which is

after the Forest Conservation Act 1980, hence the change of Kisam is

bad in law.

11.It is pertinent to mention here that from the certified copy of ROR it

is clear that in the year 1984, vide mutation case no 612/84 the kisam

of the land was changed from Chhot Jungle to Puratan Patita.

Certified copy of ROR of Khata no1 is annexed as here unto

 9
ANNEXURE-5.

12. It is pertinent to mention here that from the Sabik-Hal comparison it

is seen Plot Hal to that the pertaining area

No.19,29,33,35,39,23,24,25,26,27,28,37 corresponds to Sabik Plot

No.6,9,10,12,76 under Sabik Holding No.1 of village Kosala. These

plots were "Chhota Jungle" by kisam originally and had been

converted to "Puratan Patita" on the basis of a "Kisam change"

proceeding initiated vide Case No 612 of 1984. Certified copy of

Hal- Sabik comparison is annexed here unto as ANNEXURE-6.

13. It is further submitted that changing of Jungle Kisam by virtue of a

case bearing No.612 of 1984 violates the Forest Conservation Act.

When the Kisam of the land is 'Jungle" in any manner, conversion of

'kisam' is not viable and as such settlement/lease of land in favour of

the IDCO is ab-initio not sustainable and liable to be cancelled.

However, it is not understood how the current settlement authority

has changed a Jungle category land to other kisam land violating

provisions of Forest Conservation Act.

14.The Forest Conservation Act 1980 came into force on 25.10.1980. It

clearly speaks that "Not withstanding anything contained in any other

law for the time being in force in a State, no State Government or

other authority shall make, except with the prior approval of Central
 10
Government, any order directing that any forest land or any portion

thereof may be assigned by way of lease or otherwise to any prevate

person or to any authority, Corporation, agency or any other

organization not owned, managed or controlled by Government

restriction has - been imposed." When the case land was Jungle at the

time of Forest Conservation Act came in to being no state law can

override it so as to make the Kisam Change without prior approval

the Central Government.

15.It is submitted that Forest Conservation Act came into force from

25/10/ 1980 and the hal record is prepared in the year 2002 without

approval of central government, which is a violation of Section 2 of

Forest Conservation Act 1980.

16.That the Revenue Department, State Government of Odisha in its

letter dated 24/10/2011, letter no 43968 has clarified that the Govt.

Land recorded in non-forest kisam with a note of Sabik Kisam Jungle

in the RoR finally published after 25/10/1980 but which was forest

kisam in Sabik Record, the forest conservation Act of 1980 will be

applicable to all such forest lands. The same position has been

reiterated in the letter dated 7th March 2014 written by MOEF,

Government of India addressing to Chief Secretary, Government of

Odisha. Copy of the letter dated 24th October 2011 is annexed here

unto as ANNEXURE-7.
 11
17. That the land on which the NALCO is proposing for establishment

of rehabilitation and resettlement colony is envisaged is totally

falling under jungle kisam Revenue land mentioned in Sabik record

and no FDP (forest diversion plan) is filed thereon in acquiring the

land.

18.It is humbly submitted that the Apex Court Judgement in T N

Godavarman Case where in the Hon‟ble Court has clarified that the

definition Forest has to be understood in dictionary meaning

irrespective of the owner of such land and in this case the land in

question is a physical forest and hence attract the provisions of Forest

Conservation Act for any non-forestry activities.

19.The proposed site is meant for grazing of domestic animal and

establishment of rehabilitation and resettlement colony will impose

threat to the animal. Further, natural water sources will also be

destroyed permanently. Further the establishment of rehabilitation

and resettlement colony will also cause the adjacent agriculture land

infertile which will affect the livelihood of the people

20.That the objective of the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 is to

prevent further destruction except where it was unavoidable and

checks and balances could be built in. Thus, it has avoided arbitrary

de-reservation of large blocks of forests.

21.Section 2 of Forest Conservation Act of 1980 says that “Restriction

 12
on the de-reservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest

purpose: Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the

time being in force in a State, no State Government or other authority

shall make, except with the prior approval of the Central

Government, any order directing- (i) That any reserved forest (within

the meaning of the expression “reserved forest” in any law for the

time being in force in that State) or any portion thereof, shall cease to

be reserved: (ii)That any forest land or any portion thereof may be

used for any non-forest purpose: (iii)That any forest land or any

portion thereof may be assigned by way of lease or otherwise to any

private person or to any authority, corporation, agency or any other

organization not owned, managed or controlled by Government:

(iv)That any forest land or any portion thereof may be cleared of

trees which have grown naturally in that land or portion, for the

purpose of using it for re-afforestation.

22.It is humbly submitted that construction activity has been carried out

without Approval of Central Government under Section 2 of Forest

Conservation Act 1980. In K.M. Chinnappa v. Union of India, 2003

AIR SCW 23, the Supreme Court observed that unless and until the

Central Government's permission is obtained under the Forest

(Conservation) Act, no forest land can be allowed to be used for non-

forest purposes.
 13
23.In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs. Union of India WP© 202 of

1995 and order dated 12/12/1996, the Supreme Court examined the

National Forest Policy and issued certain directions in the light of the

provisions of the Central Act. Direction 1 is important and reads as

under:

“In view of the meaning of the word "forest" in the Act, it is

obvious that prior approval of the Central Government is required

for any non-forest activity within the area of any "forest". In

accordance with Section 2 of the Act, all on-going activity within

any forest in any State throughout the country, without the prior

approval of the Central Government, must cease forthwith. It is,

therefore, clear that the running of saw mills of any kind including

veneer or plywood mills, and mining of any mineral are non-forest

purposes and are, therefore, not permissible without prior approval

of the Central Government. Accordingly, any such activity is prima

facie violation of the provisions of the Forest Conservation Act,

1980. Every State Government must promptly ensure total cessation

of all such activities forthwith”.

24.The Hon‟ble Supreme court of India in T N Godavarman case

(Supra) has clarified the scope of forest conservation act and

definition of forest as the dictionary meaning irrespective of

 14
ownership. Relevant part of the judgment that is applicable in the

present instance is reproduced here as follows:

“It has emerged at the hearing, that there is a misconception in certain

quarters about the true scope of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (for

short the „Act‟) and the meaning of the word "forest" used therein. There

is also a resulting misconception about the need of prior approval of the

Central Government, as required by Section 2 of the Act, in respect of

certain activities in the forest area which are more often of a commercial

nature. It is necessary to clarify that position. The Forest Conservation

Act, 1980 was enacted with a view to check further deforestation which

ultimately results in ecological imbalance; and therefore, the provisions

made therein for the conservation of forests and for matters connected

therewith, must apply to all forests irrespective of the nature of ownership

or classification thereof. The word "forest: must be understood according

to its dictionary meaning. This description cover all statutorily recognised

forests, whether designated as reserved, protected or otherwise for the

purpose of Section 2(i) of the Forest Conservation Act. The term "forest

land", occurring in Section 2, will not only include "forest" as understood

in the dictionary sense, but also any area recorded as forest in the

Government record irrespective of the ownership. This is how it has to be

understood for the purpose of Section 2 of the Act. The provisions enacted
 15
in the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 for the conservation of forests and

the matters connected therewith must apply clearly to all forests so

understood irrespective of the ownership or classification thereof.” This

aspect has been made abundantly clear in the decisions of this Court in

Ambica Quarry Works and ors. versus State of Gujarat and ors. (1987 (1)

SCC 213), Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra versus State of U.P.

(1989 Suppl. (1) SCC 504), and recently in the order dated 29th

November, 1996 in W.P.(C) No.749/95 (Supreme Court Monitoring

Committee vs. Mussorie Dehradun Development Authority and ors. The

earlier decision of this Court in State of Bihar Vs. Banshi Ram

Modiandors. (1985 (3) SCC 643) has, therefore, to be understood in the

light of these subsequent decisions. We consider it necessary to reiterate

this settled position emerging from the decisions of this court to dispel the

doubt, if any, in the perception of any State Government or authority. This

has become necessary also because of the stand taken on behalf of the

State of Rajasthan, even at this late stage, relating to permissions granted

for mining in such area which is clearly contrary to the decisions of this

court. It is reasonable to assume that any State Government which has

failed to appreciate the correct position in law so far, will forthwith correct

its stance and take the necessary remedial measures without any further

delay”.
 16
25.Fait Accompli Situation and Post Facto Clearance: That if the private

respondent is not restrained from going ahead with the construction and

change of land use, then it would complete the project causing

irreversible damage to the environment and will then seek post-facto

Forest Clearance from the authorities making it a fait accompli situation.

Hon‟ble Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal in number of cases

and the recent one is in OA NO 37 of 2015 (S P MuthuramanVs Union

Of India) has hold all such post facto clearances are null and void.

GROUNDS

That the non-forest use of forest land and in this case for non- forest

purpose without prior approval of central government is violating the

provision of Section 2 of Forest Conservation Act 1980 and Order of

Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Godavarman Case in W.P(c) 202 of 1995.

That industrial activity in absence of any approval from central

government is an offence under the forest conservation act of 1980 and

violation of Hon‟ble Supreme court order of 12-12-1996 in W.P © 202

of 1995.

PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF

Restrain the Tahasildar Chhendipada from transferring from handing over

of the physical forest to IDCO and Nalco pending disposal of the Original
Application.
 17
LIMITATION

That the present application is being filed within six months from the
order passed by Hon‟ble High Court of Orissa dated 06/04/2024 in
W.P.(C) No. 857 of 2024, hence the application is not barred by
limitation.

PRAYER

In light of the present facts and circumstances it is most respectfully

prayed that this Hon‟ble Tribunal may be pleased to

a. Restrain the respondents and IDCO from accessing and using the
forest land for non-forest activity until approval of central
government is obtained under Forest Conservation Act of 1980.
b. Hold and Declare that the conversion of Sabik forest land to non-
forest kisam is contrary to law and there by illegal
c. Hold and declare that lease granted in favor of IDCO and
subsequent transfer to the NALCO as illegal and void for want of
forest clearance.
d. Pass any other order(s)/direction(s) that Your Lordships may
deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, equity and good
conscience.

For this act of kindness the Applicant shall remain ever grateful to

you.

DATE-24/08/2024

APPLICANTS THROUGH
ADVOCATE
 18

BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO -....... OF 2024/EZ

NOTARYIN THE MATTER OF:
ANGUL
Dillip Kumar Pradhan and Another APPLICANTS

VERSUS

STATE OF ODISHA AND Others ... RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

I, Dillip Kumar Pradhan S/o Khira Mohan Pradhan, aged about 64 years,
Akikhola po-Kosala,Dist-Angul, pin-759130 do hereby solemnly affirm,
SH
P.K
ohnlehtfaka as under:
t .
ORegd.No-OC
Exp.on-24.9.20
ANGU,
Iam one of the applicants in the above mentioned Original
Ooslication and I am fully conversant with the facts and circumstances
T OKt the case and therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That I have read over the contents of the accompanying Original
Affidavit and
application the same is true and correct and is drafted on my
instruction.
3. That I am authorized by other applicant to swear this affidavit.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION
Verified on this day of f t . 2024 at 9ng.that the
contents of the above affidavit are true and correct. No part of it is false
and nothing material has been concealed there from.
Au242b A-og-900y
(legnti ie$y3 ) Soleiniy Aftirms & States Dilep kecn
Advocate)' oo
Betore me on ldenificalion by DEPONENT
SriP.Jb0hera.Advocate

NOTARY, ANGUL
Regd. No- ON-022006
GOVT. OF ODISHA
19

ANNEXURE-1
20
21
22
 23
2

-19 Anexure-1
2
ANNEXURE-2

OrissaIndustrial lnfrastructure
Development Corporation
(A Govemment of Orissa Undertaking)
IDCO Towers, Janpath, Bhubaneswar -751022, Orissa, Indla
Phones: (0674) 2542784, 2540820, Fax:2540749, 2542956
ideo
Vour pouwer lo grow
ISO 9001/& 14001 CORPORATION
Email: md@idcolndia.com

No.HO/P&A-LA-E- 5513/09/ Dated October-2099

/9468
The Tahasildar,
Chhendipada.
Ac.54.20
Sub:- Lease of Government (leasable) land measuring
(21.9360 Ha.) in village Kosala under Chhendipada Tahasil for
establishment of industries (R&R Colony).
Memo No.1492
Ref.:- This Office letter No.9869 Dt.4.6.09 &
Dt.15.10.09 of ADM, Angul.
Sir,
which
above on the captioned subiect ir
Please refer to the letters cited
land measuring Hla.51.30 (Ac.126.76) ín
application for lease of non-forest Government for
facilitating sanction of lease in favour of IDCO
village Kosala has b2en filed before you for colony.
authorities for establishment of rehabilitation
in turn allotment to M/s. NALCO 90%of the
Additional District Magistrate, Angul that
It has been intimated by of Kosala.
and is under the control of villagers
requisitioned area covers thick forest arowth
requisition filed for the purpose and requesled
Further he has suggested to drop the original piots inCiuing a
adjoining private as weii as goveriment
to file irevised piopUsai aíresh
portion of plot no.19, which was filed earlie:.
herewith revised laFd schedule, land plan
In vie# oi the above, we are sending
said viliaa: to
measuring Ha.21.9360 (Ac.54.20) in the
erc. in quadruplicate for lcasable land
alienation proposal filed earlier for Ho.5).39
facilitate process of aiienation propOsal. The
dropped.
(Ác.126.76) vide Iter under reference may please be
Yours faithfully,

EDcl.:-1. Land plan 4copies

2. Land schedule 04 copies
3. From No. 1 Z04 copies Chief General Manager(P&A)
Memo No. ..DE.
Magistrate, Angul for
Copy forwarded to the Collector, Angul/ Additional District
kind information andnecessary action.

Chief Generál Manager(P&A) ...

TAHAS0LDAR
CHHENDIPADA
 24

FORM - |
Sce Rule-5(2)
APPLICATION FÖR SETTLEMENT OF LAND
To
The Tathasldar, chhn Pada
1. (A) Name of the
Applicant : CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (P&A),
IDCÓTOWERS; JANPATH,
BHUBANESWAR-751022
(8) Age
2.
Father's Name
3. (a) Present Residential Address (in full)
(b) Permanent Home Address (in full) : 1DCO, IDCO Towers, Janpath,
Bhubaneswar
4. Caste : whether SC/ST/Other
5. Number of Fanily Members
6. Whether belongs to joint family or a
member of single family
7. Annual Income

(a) From Agriculture

(b) From other sources

8. Extent of land owned by him ir his name
or in the name of other members of his
family in urban area/ rural area

9 (a) Occupation of the aplicant

(D) Occupation of the faily members

10. Detailed particulars of iand applied for
(a) Name of village/ Nane of urban area
village:- Ko sala
Chendkpa
Dist:

(b) Holding number, if any : As per land schedule

(c) Plot number if any : As per lar:d plan

(d) Area applied for

(e) Boundary : As per land plan
11. Purpose for which the land is required
:Establishment of Industries.

Chief General MaragutPA),

IDCO, Bhubaneswar
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER(P&A)
TAHASRDAR IDCO, BHUBANESWAR
ÇHHENDIPADA
 25

Revised Land Schedule

(Govemment LandN(Leasable)
Name of the Village :Kosala
Name of the Police Station : Chhendipada
Name of the Tahasil :Chhendipada
District Angul
Area Area
Total Area proposed proposed Classifi Name ofthe
SL Khata Plot No in for for Tenant
cation
No No alienation alienation
hectares
in hectares in acres
Govt, of Orissa
Kaju
24.3000 4.8563 12.00 (Rakhita)
1 1389 19(P).. Bagayat .

Kaju Govt. of Orissa

29
1.3500 e 1.3500 3.34
Bagayat (Rakhita)
2 1389 Govt. of Grissa
Kaju
3.5500| 3.5500! E.77 (Rakhita)
1389 33 Bagayat
Govt. of Orissa
18.10|
Kaju
1389 35(P) 11.150ol 7.3257 Bagayat (Rakhita)
Govt. of Orissa
Kaju
2.5000 6.18 (Rakhita)
5 1389 39 2.5000 Bagayat
Patita Govt. of Orissa (AJA)
0.0810) 0.20
1391 23 0.0810|
Patita MGovt. of Orissa (AJA)
0.1400 0.1400 0.35
7 1391 24:
Ruvi. of ærissa iÀjA)
).60! Patita
25 9.24301 0.2430
1391
Govt. of Ori5s2 (AJA)|
0.5450 0.5450| 1.35; Patita
1391
0.68
Patita Govt. of O:i553 (AJA)
27 -- 0.2750 0.2750
10 1391
Patita 1Govt. of COrissa (AJA)!
0.1000! 0.10G0| 0.25i
1 1391
Patita Govt. of Orissa (AJA)
0.9700 0.9700 2.40|
12| 1391
21.9360 54.20|

oricar Chief General-Managér(PA)

Land IHspecto IDCO
-IDCO &A)
LAND OFFICER GENERAL MANAGER(P
CHIEFIDCÜ,8HUBANESWAR
Dco, BHUBANESWAR

TAHAZILDAR
CHHENDIPADA
 26 ANNEXURE-3

THAT THE BELOW ATTACHED PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWS THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION IS HAVING A
LARGE NUMBER OF TREES AND QUALIFIES THE DICTIONARY MEANING OF FOREST.
27
28
 29

THAT THE GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE SUGGESTS THAT THE LAND IN

QUESTION IS CONTIGOUS TOTHE KOSALA RESERVE FOREST .
30
ANNEXURE-4
31
 32

Retyped copy of Sub- Collector Angul dated 04/04/1994

ORDER

The respondent is absent on call. This is an appeal u/s 12(1) of the 0.P.L.E. Act,
1972 filed by the A.G.P., Angul against the orders dated 16.8.87 in Ancroachment
Case No. 134/87-08 passed by the Tahasildar, Chhendipada settling the following
land with the respondent Sri Suresh Ch. Mohapatra, S/o- Satyabadi Mohapatra,
Vill- Kosala.

Vill.- Kosala, Khata No.-2/2, Plot No.- 1, Area- Ac 2.0 dec.

The appeal claimed on the following grounds,

1, That the land being "Chhot Jangle" kisam could not be leased out for non forest
purpose without approval of the Central Government.

2. That due procedure of law have not been followed.

I would like to harp on the R.o.R. position first to find out if the plot
leased out was forest land attracting the provisions of Forest conservation Act,
1980.

The R.O.R position stood thus in the settlement records :

Khata-1, Plot No-1, Area- Ac 59.96dec. , Kisam- “Chott Jungle”.

It continued as such till 1972-73 when by a reservation proceeding it was changed

thus,

Khata-2/2, Plot No-1, Ac 50.96 dec, “Choot Jungle”.

This status continued upto 1984 when in a Mutation proceeding No.612/84 the
kisam was changed to "Puratan Patita

Thus it is seen that by the time Forest Conservation Act, 1980 came into force, i.e.,
25.10. 80 the land continued as forest land and hence could not be put to non-forest
use without approval of Central Government.

Thus on this ground settlement of land with the respondent is bad in law and is
liable to be quashed. Therefore I refrain from going into the other ground claimed
 33

in the appeal. The order of the settlement of the suit land with the respondent is
therefore set-aside and the appeal is allowed.

Orders pronounced in the open court this day the 4th April, 1994.
 34
AmoUse-12
ANNEXURE-5
Seies

Schecule 0-Egrm No, 39,A

6@

0SBLANK SPACE FORSTANEING

YANARLaAR,
 35
-12:

a60.T22

COPIEDBY
Reco
Tahasi Ofice
Chhendipada

arsp

iomg) 123-20,8,6o18-3.1^66-2
 36
ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE-5
Khatian
Mouza: Kosala Tahasil: Angul
Thana: Chhendipada Tahasil Number: 20
Thana Number: 115 District: Dhenkanal

Name of the Jamidar and Khewat or Khatian serial number Odisha Government Khewat number
1) Khatain Serial no 1
2) Name of the Tenant, Father’s name, caste and residence
3) Satwa
4) Payable Water Tax Khajana Cess Nistar Cess and Total 5) Cumulative Khajana
other cess if any description

6) Special annexure if any

BLANK SPACE FOR STAMPING

Last publication date-

Khajana date –

Khatian Serial number-1 Mouza - Kosala District -

Dhenkanal
Plot no & Chaka Kisam & Plot Detail description of the Kisam & Area Remark
name Name Chouhadi
Acres Decimal Hectares
1 Chhot Jungle Vide case no 612/84 kisam of the 50 96
land have been changed from Chhot
Jungle to Puratan patita.
 37

2 Nayana Jori 1 06 PWD

3 Road 0 58 Concrete Road ,
PWD Angul to
Bagadi
4 Nayana Jori 1 70 PWD
5 Chhot Jungle Vide case no 612/84 kisam of the 38 54
6 Chhot Jungle land have been changed from Chhot 38 54
9 Chhot Jungle Jungle to Puratan patita. 50 48
10 Chhot Jungle 32 29
12 Chhot Jungle 12 48
20 Chhot Jungle 0 83

CERTIFIED COPY ISSUED ON 25/02/2019

 Date

copy"the
of
appllcatlon

for

theDate
stamps
follos,and
requlsite
flxed

for
number
STWENTYFIVE PATSE K
notlfylng

of

requlslte
atampsand Dato
of
38

follos.dellvery

92 R
of
the

was Date

enre roady on
whlch
for
dellvery. the
copy
Chhendipada Cür:O
Recor BY
Office.
Tahasi
Date
copy

Keeper to of
maklng
the
appllcant.
over
ANNEXURE-6

the
 39
COPEDY
Recoy eeper
Tahas, dfice
Chhendlpada

Censared be
 40
ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE-6

MOUZA-KOSALA TAHASIL- CHHENDIPADA

POLICE STATION- CHHENDIPADA TAHASIL NO-115

POLICE STATION NO- 115 DISTRICT- ANGUL

PLOT INDEX

SABIK KHATA NO. SABIK PLOT NO. HAL PLOT NO. CORRSEPONDENT
HAL KHATA NO.
1 6 18 1389
19 1389
22 1389
29 1389- 1391
23 1391
24 1391
25 1391
26 1391
27 1391
28 1391
9 18 1389
19 1389
10 22 1389
33 1389-1391
24 1391
32 1391
25 1391
35 1389
12 39 1389-1391
32 1391
76 35 1389
71 1389
72 1389
73 1389
74 1389
36 1391
70 1391
75 1389
76 1389
77 1389
123 1389
124 1389
155 1389
156 1389
157 1389
CERTIFIED COPY OF PLOT INDEX OF VILLAGE KOSALA
41
ANNEXURE-7
42
 43

VAKALATNAMA EATE RN ZONE,

IN THE COURT OF NATICRAL REEN TRIBUNA2, KOLRAT
O. Ase No. /20
Between
DAR kuman hhan Anothen ComplaintPlaintiff/Pertioner/Respondent
Versus
date &oha and others Opp.Accused/Defendent/Party/Respondent

Know all men by these presents, that by this Vakalatnama,

IWe Diip kiwnan hadhan Sco-khien Mohan modhan, od abut
hanth Sankar Saho So-ten kunan Soho, o9

pase do,ho
Peitioner/Plaintiff/Defendant/Respondant/Opposite Party/ in the aforesaid
an A t o
appoint and retain
Sankanaldai
Advocate(s) to appearfor me/ us in the above case and to conduct and prosecute (or defenhe same
and allprocedings that may be taken in respect of any applications connected with the same or any
decree or order passed their in inclucding all applications for return of documents or receipt of any money
that may be payable to meus in the said case and also in application for review in appeals (s) under the
Odisha High Court order and any application for leave to appeal to Supreme Court. IWe authorise mylour
Advocate(s) to admit any compromise lawfully entered in the said case.

Dated the
4S/08 024
Received from the Executant (S), Satisfied that
he/they is / are party / parties and accepted.
Ihold no brief for the other side.

ADVOCATE ADVOCATE
Accepted as above
Accepted as above

ADVOCATE
Accepted as above
ADVOCATE
Accepted as above

ADVOCATE ADVOCATE
Signature of the Executant (s)
44