State of Telangana vs. Mohd. Abdul Qasim (D) per LRs. (Supreme Court, 18 April 2024)
Background
This case concerned a long-standing dispute over 106.34 acres of land in Kompally, near Hyderabad, designated as reserved forest under the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967. Mohd. Abdul Qasim (since deceased, represented by legal representatives) claimed ownership of this land, arguing that a survey error in the 1950s wrongfully classified his property as forest land. The State of Telangana consistently treated the land as protected forest. In 2018, the High Court dismissed Qasim’s claim, finding no proof of title or possession, and upholding the land’s reserved forest status.
Procedural History
Despite the 2018 dismissal, Qasim sought review, presenting “new evidence” related to the old survey. In 2021, the High Court reversed its earlier decision, granting Qasim title based on this evidence. The State of Telangana appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court had overstepped its review jurisdiction and undermined statutory forest protections.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
The Supreme Court, led by Justice M.M. Sundresh, strongly criticized the High Court’s 2021 review decision. The Court held:
The High Court misapplied its review powers, which are to be used only in exceptional circumstances where there is a manifest error or new, credible evidence unavailable earlier. The so-called “new evidence” was not sufficient to overturn the earlier findings.
The plaintiff failed to establish any legal title or actual possession of the land. The original findings that the land was reserved forest remained conclusive.
The officials of Telangana had abdicated their statutory duty to protect forests by supporting the plaintiff’s claim, contrary to constitutional obligations under Articles 48A and 51A(g).
The Court emphasized the need to shift from an anthropocentric to an ecocentric approach, recognizing the rights of nature and the imperative of forest conservation for climate justice and economic stability.
Judgment and Outcome
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s 2021 review judgment, reinstating the 2018 dismissal of Qasim’s claim. The reserved forest status of the land was affirmed, and the Court imposed costs of ₹5 lakhs on the State for failing in its duty to protect the forest. The judgment reinforced the absolute statutory bar on acquiring rights over reserved forest land and the limited scope of judicial review in such matters.
Significance
This decision is a landmark in Indian environmental jurisprudence, affirming that forests are a national asset and must be protected against encroachment. The Court’s reasoning linked environmental protection to the constitutional right to life, underscored the economic value of forests, and called for “green accounting” in national wealth assessments. The ruling sends a strong message against arbitrary executive actions that undermine environmental law and reiterates the judiciary’s role in upholding ecological and constitutional mandates.
Citation: State of Telangana & Ors. v. Mohd. Abdul Qasim (Died) Per LRs., [2024] 5 S.C.R. 81 : 2024 INSC 310, Supreme Court of India, Judgment dated 18 April 2024.
RELATED Blog
0 comments