Legalised plunder of 85 acres of forest land in Shivamogga district

Bengaluru: In Survey No 33, out of 145 acres 27 guntas of land at Nettakki village, Kuppagade Hobli, Soraba taluk in Shivamogga district 85 acres are under encroachment.

Out of 145 acres and 27 guntas, 106 acres is Soppinabetta and the remaining 39 acres 27 guntas is gomal/dhangalege muffat.

Soppinabetta is minor forests allowed by the State government for the areca growers in the Western Ghats in Karnataka.

In 2017 more than 87 acres of land was granted by Chandrashekar, tehsildar of Sorab, to 29 people. On August 10, 2020 the Assistant Commissioner of Sagar cancelled all the grants on the ground that the land in Survey No 33 is Soppinabetta and comes under the definition of statutory forest. Once the grants were cancelled the Range Forest Officer (RFO) of Anavatti who booked a forest offence case on September 9, 2020 recommended to the Assistant Conservator of Forest (ACF) of Soraba to initiate eviction proceedings under (64)(A) of the Karnataka Forest Act. The ACF of Soraba wrote a letter on September 14, 2020 to the appellants in which he clearly stated that 105 out of 145 acres constituted statuary forest and initiated eviction proceedings also.

In December 2020, the ACF issued the eviction notice to the encroachers.

The satellite image shows that till May 1, 2006 only 2 to 3 acres was encroached and on December 21, 2010, 5 to 6 acres were encroached and in 2017 once the grant was made more than 85 acres of the land was encroached.

"Without following the Rules 97(4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue (KLR) Rules 1966, section 2 of Forest Conservation Act 1980 and the Supreme Court order Dated:13.11.2000 land in question had been granted to the below stated persons. Hence grant of Soppinabetta in favour of below stated persons is not sustainable in law," said advocate Virendra Patil who has appealed against the encroachers.

The said grants have been made by the revenue authorities without informing the Nettakki villagers and did not give an opportunity to them to file an objection against the grants.

The people who were given the grant challenged the eviction order in the Karnataka High Court, on the ground that there was no record proving that the land in the Survey No 33 was part of the forest and that they were cultivating the land much before the government had declared it as a forest land. In 1996, the Supreme Court in its interim order had issued explicit direction for cessation of all non-forestry activities within the forest area without the prior approval of the Central government and asserted that the word "Forest" must be understood according to its dictionary meaning and any area in the government records irrespective of ownership will be regarded as forest.