PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court has issued notice to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government, seeking its response to a petition for establishment of a forest tribunal for hearing forest-related disputes.
A bench consisting of Justice Syed Mohammad Attique Shah and Justice Mohammad Faheem Wali directed an additional advocate general, Adnan Ali, to submit a proper report in the matter on Jan 23, the next date of hearing.
The bench also directed the government to maintain status quo in a dispute between the forest department and the petitioner, Alamzeb, a resident of Swat, over a piece of land, which had been in possession of the petitioner but the department claimed that it was forest land.
The petitioner has sought directives of the court for government to constitute forest tribunal at the earliest to redress his grievance against the forest department. He also requested the court to declare as illegal an eviction notice issued to him by forest department on Aug 30, 2024, asking him to vacate the disputed land.
PHC fixes Jan 23 as next date for hearing of the petition
The respondents in the petition are KP government through its chief secretary, secretary of forest department, chief conservator of forest and Swat’s forest conservator.
Advocate Rehmanullah Shah appeared for the petitioner and stated that Chaman, the father of his client, had a dispute with the government over a piece of land due to which he had filed a civil suit against the government in the court of Swat senior civil judge.
He said that after recording of evidence the trial court had decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff in the year 2000. He added that feeling aggrieved of the said order, the government had filed an appeal before the court of Swat district judge.
The counsel stated that the appellate court rejected the government’s appeal on June 22, 2002 and maintained the judgement of the trial court. However, he said that the present respondent field a revision petition in Peshawar High Court’s Mingora bench.
He said that high court on March 20, 2012 disposed of that petition and directed both the parties to appear before forest settlement board (FSB) and its hierarchy as per mandate of KP Forest Ordinance, 2002. He claimed that without informing the petitioner and his predecessor, the respondents symbolically constituted FSB, which submitted an inquiry report.
Mr Shah stated that the impugned inquiry report had not been addressed to any of the party concern and it was also not having any reference number, date or stamp by any official or member. He added that based on the report, the respondents served the impugned eviction notice on the petitioner.
The counsel argued that his client preferred an appeal before the forest tribunal under Forest Ordinance, 2002, but since filing of the appeal the tribunal had not been functional.
He said that the respondents were duty bound to constitute forest tribunal under the ordinance to redress grievance of the petitioner as well as other appellants.
The counsel stated that under section 17 of Forest Ordinance, the government had to establish a forest tribunal composed of three persons to be appointed by it, which should hear appeals. Moreover, he stated that FSB was also not properly constituted as per the mandate of section 5 of the ordinance.
Published in Dawn, January 13th, 2025
Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.