| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1953 SLG 29 1953 SLD 29 1953 PLD 329 |
Lahore High Court
Second Appeal No. 41 of 1951, decided on 18th February, 1953, from the decree of Bashir Ahmad, District Judge, Mianwali, dated the 7th November, 1950
MUHAMMAD KHURSHID ZAMAN AND B. Z. KAIKAUS, JJ
S. A. Mahmood, Assistant to the Advocate-General for Appellant. Chiragh Din for
Respondents
Second Appeal No. 41 of 1951, decided on 18th February, 1953, from the decree of Bashir Ahmad, District Judge, Mianwali, dated the 7th November, 1950
MUHAMMAD KHURSHID ZAMAN AND B. Z. KAIKAUS, JJ
S. A. Mahmood, Assistant to the Advocate-General for Appellant. Chiragh Din for
Respondents
The PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT, WEST PUNJAB
VS
FATEH KHAN and others
Law: Forests Act, 1927
Section: 30(b),34,33(2)
(a) Forest Act (XVI of 1927), S. 30 (b)---Whole-area cannot be declared closed-Notification declaring whole area closed illegal. Under clause (b), only apart of the protected forest could be declared closed. The words 'such forest' to this clause, clearly refer to a protected forest mentioned in clause (a). The notification is clearly illegal, there being no authority to declare the whole area closed. The condition precedent to the closing of an area is that that part of the protected forest which is not closed be "sufficient and in locality reasonably convenient for the clue exercise of the rights suspended in the closed area. The whole being closed, this condition cannot possibly be fulfilled. The notification is ultra vires. (b) Forest Act (XVI of 1927), S. 34-Rights recorded under S.29--When can be interfered with. Rights recorded under section 29 cannot be interfered with at all except in a closed forest of when rights are suspended on account of fire under section 33 (2). The forest in this case was not validly closed under section 30 (b) and section 33 (2) had no application. Therefore nothing done under the provisions of the Chapter relating to protected forests can affect the rights of the plaintiffs. No doubt section 29 had not been applied to this land and rights had not been recorded but by the mere non-application of section 29, the persons concerned cannot be deprived of rights which they would have if it was a Government instead of a private forest. As sections 30 and 32 are subject to section 34, they were not intended except in a case of a closed forest to abridge private rights. Rules 1 and 3 of Rules published, under Notification No. 196, therefore, would not affect the plaintiffs' right. (c) Forest Act (XVI of 1927), S. 30-Controlled by S. 34. Forest must be validly closed before Government can interfere it iih rights of public. Section 30 is controlled by section 34 and is not intended to enable the Provincial Government, to interfere with the exercise of a right, except when the forest is validly closed. Rule 6 too is invalid. The fact that the rules were framed on the assumption that the forest was closed, is itself a defect which renders…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492