CJI Gavai’s First Verdict: Pune Land Transfer Was illegal

The new Chief Justice of India (CJI), Bhushan R. Gavai, who took oath yesterday (14th May), has delivered his first verdict as the CJI. He declared the Maharashtra government's 1998 decision to transfer forest land to private entities for non-forest use as illegal.

In the verdict on the high-profile Pune land scam case, the Supreme Court (SC) strongly criticised the nexus between officials and developers. “This is a classic example of the nexus between politicians, bureaucrats, and builders,” the Bench observed, while ordering that the disputed land be returned to the forest department, media reported.

The apex court observed that the rapid land-use change passed by the Maharashtra government in 1998, between July and August, directly involved the then revenue minister. “The alarming speed with which the government of Maharashtra changed land use... shows the then-minister for revenue was involved,” the judgment said.

The court’s ruling is seen to have wider implications, as the SC has directed all states and Union Territories to conduct a review on whether any forest land had been diverted to private parties for non-forest purposes. The court has also ordered that such land be restored to the respective forest departments.

Chief Secretaries of all states and Union Territories (UTs) have been instructed to ensure that all government forest land is officially handed over to the forest department. “If the land has become non-forest by conversion, then let an adequate amount be calculated for afforestation,” the court said.

The Bench also barred state authorities from leasing out reserved forest land without prior approval of the central government. “Reserved forest land cannot be assigned by lease by state authorities to any person/entity without prior approval of the Centre,” it said.

The case concerns the illegal allocation of 11.86 acres of forest land in Kondhwa Budruk, Pune, by the state revenue department to Richie Rich Colony. The then state government did this despite opposition from the forest department. The court also termed the environmental clearance granted to the project as unlawful.