At a packed courtroom in New Delhi this week, the Supreme Court delivered a significant ruling impacting dozens of land parcels across Maharashtra. A Bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath set aside a 2018 Bombay High Court order that had upheld the State’s claim that certain privately owned lands were “private forests” and therefore vested in the government. The Court found that the State had not followed mandatory legal steps before treating the lands as acquired.
Background
The dispute traces back to notices said to have been issued in the 1960s under Section 35(3) of the Indian Forest Act. These notices were meant to inform landowners that their lands were being considered for forest regulation. However, many landowners claimed they never received these notices. For decades, the lands continued to be recorded and treated as privately held. No compensation was paid, no possession was taken, and landowners continued to cultivate, sell, or develop their properties.
Read also: Supreme Court Orders Fresh Auction for Mahanadi Sand Quarry, Says Tender Process Misread 'Previous
Yet, starting around the early 2000s, the State began marking such lands as “private forest” in revenue records, which effectively blocked land transactions and triggered a wave of litigation.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court stressed that the judiciary functions on hierarchical discipline, meaning lower courts must follow legal principles settled by the Supreme Court. The judgment sharply noted that the High Court had failed to correctly apply the earlier three-judge ruling in Godrej & Boyce vs State of Maharashtra (2014).
Read also: Supreme Court Restores Dowry Harassment Case, Says High Courts Cannot Conduct 'Mini-Trial' While
The Court explained that simply issuing a notice in the Gazette in the 1960s was not enough to convert private land into State-owned forest.
“The bench observed, ‘The expression “issued” under Section 35 cannot be separated from service. Without service, the right to object becomes illusory.’”
The Court further remarked that the State’s reliance on decades-old documents without proof of personal service, proper inquiry, or final notification under forest law could not justify treating the land as vested in the government.
Possession was a major factor. The Bench noted that the State never actually took possession under the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act. In many cases, families continued farming on the same soil for generations. The Court referred to the State’s action as “post-hoc justification,” noting that government agencies had decades to take proper steps but simply did not.
Decision
The Supreme Court allowed all appeals, set aside the Bombay High Court judgment, and quashed all mutation entries that labeled the lands as private forests. It directed that revenue records must be corrected to reflect private ownership again.
However, the Court left the door open for the State to act in the future - but only if it follows proper legal procedure:“Liberty is reserved to the State to initiate proceedings afresh, in accordance with law.”
The ruling effectively restores ownership status to the landholders, ending years of administrative uncertainty - at least for now.
Case Title: Rohan Vijay Nahar & Others vs State of Maharashtra & Others
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
Case Type: Civil Appeals (Batch of 96 Appeals)
Citation:2025 INSC 1296
Decided On:07 November 2025
