In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has struck down a government decision that had classified land in Ambernath as “private forest” for nearly 20 years, providing major relief to a Thane-based family that challenged the classification.
The petition was filed by Sandhya Gurung and her family, owners of multiple plots in Mulgaon village in Ambernath taluka of Thane district. The family stated that the land was legally purchased through registered sale deeds in the 1990s. At the time of purchase, official revenue records showed no indication of forest reservation, government ownership, or any legal restrictions. They maintained that the title was clear and unencumbered, with no dispute attached to the property.
The controversy arose years later when Maharashtra government authorities updated land records to reflect the state’s ownership and began treating the plots as “private forest” under applicable forest laws. The petitioners contended that they were never informed about any such classification proceedings and only became aware of the issue much later. Upon seeking details through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, they found that the government was relying on decades-old forest notifications issued in the 1950s under the Indian Forest Act, 1927.
The state argued that the land fell under earlier forest notifications and that notices had been issued to original landholders many years ago. Officials also stated that revenue records were corrected as part of a broader exercise to update historical forest entries.
However, the court noted that the government failed to produce any proof showing that such notices were actually served to the original owners. Authorities conceded that there was no acknowledgment or documentary evidence of service available.
A division bench comprising Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande held that mere issuance of notices was insufficient unless proper service was proven. The court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited v. State of Maharashtra, which mandates that the government must establish both issuance and valid service of notices.
The judges also observed that the forest notification in question was nearly 70 years old and that the property had changed ownership multiple times since then. Importantly, when the Gurung family purchased the land, official records contained no forest-related entry.
Concluding that the state had failed to prove proper service of notices, the High Court ruled that the land could not be treated as a private forest and set aside the government’s entry, granting relief to the petitioners.
Source: Mumbai Mirror
