Live
- They always want me to win, and now I feel lucky to have been offered a story like ‘Zebra’: Satyadev Kancharana
- ‘Democracy first, humanity first’: PM Modi in Guyana's parliament on two countries' similarities
- PKL Season 11: Telugu Titans register third straight win to top standings
- Is Pollution Contributing to Your COPD?
- NASA Unveils Underwater Robots for Exploring Jupiter's Moons
- Additional Central forces arrive in violence-hit Manipur
- AR Rahman and Saira Banu’s Divorce: Legal Insights into Common Issues in Bollywood Marriages
- 82.7 pc work completed in HPCL Rajasthan Refinery area: official
- Curfew relaxation extended in 5 Manipur districts on Friday
- Tab scam prompts Bengal govt to adopt caution over fund disbursement
Just In
Vast forest land in Shivamogga open to encroachment as govt fails to act on HC order
The High Court of Karnataka in March had ordered that any denotification of forest made under Section 28 of the Karnataka Forest Act 1963, after October 24, 1980, without the approval of the Central government be withdrawn.
Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka in March had ordered that any denotification of forest made under Section 28 of the Karnataka Forest Act 1963, after October 24, 1980, without the approval of the Central government be withdrawn.
It is now learnt that the forest department is yet to withdraw the denotification notification in respect of 260 acres of forest land in Shivamogga district.
The High Court had quashed the notification issued in 2017, for rehabilitating people affected by Linganamakki dam project area in 1960. The denotification was found to be illegal as the prior permission of the Central government was not taken. The consequences of such inaction could have serious repercussions in future as vast tracts of forest lands in the district are yet to be transferred (mutation) to the forest department.
Veerendra R.Patil, an advocate, has written to the Additional Chief Secretary to Government (Forest, Ecology and Environment) requesting him to clear all pending mutations in respect of notified forest.
The advocate explained that out of 3,61,229.86 hectares of forest area in Shivamogga, 2,52,482.51 hectares has been mutated in revenue records (RTC), which leaves 1,08,747.35 hectares unprotected as they are yet to be transferred to the forest department.
On May 15, 1996, the Government of India approved diversion of 14,848,83 hectares of forest land for regularization of encroachments that happened prior to April 27, 1978 in respect of 19,348 cases in Karnataka subject to conditions.
The Union government gave clearance to 1401.62 hectares encroached by 2,216 families and 1071 hectares of encroached area was cleared by the Shivamogga DC. The claim over 598 hectares by 975 encroachers was rejected by the DC.
In District Level Committee formed under the Forests Rights Act (FRA), Shivamogga conducted the proceedings in March 2015, October 2015 and July 2016 in which more than 2500 acres of forest land was granted to the in-eligible persons and more than 29 acres of the reserve forest land was given to a family which had already sufficient land.
"The 12(1) report dated February 28, 2018 of the Upa-Lokayukta said that in Shivamogga Circle alone as many as 51,892 cases were registered for the encroachment of 86,161.81 acres of forest land under the FRA, which is the highest in the State. The 12(1) report that asked for the resumption of the forest land was not implemented even though more than three years elapsed. The Upa-Lokayukta directed to resume the forest land illegally registered under the DLC proceedings," Patil claimed. He further pointed out that the District Level Committee of Shivamogga deliberately showed a less extent of statuary forest than that is recorded in government records. The officers of the forest department were accused of aiding the encroachers.
Moreover, the delay in issuing final notification with respect to the list of the extent of the deemed and statuary forest was taken advantage of by encroachers, Patil said. "This means availability of less land for final notification. To top it all, no settlement officer has been appointed in this case," he added.
© 2024 Hyderabad Media House Limited/The Hans India. All rights reserved. Powered by hocalwire.com