In Brief
This judgment upholds the binding precedent of Godrej & Boyce (2014) against private forest acquisition claims in Maharashtra. Landowners challenged revenue mutations that branded their lands as vested in the State under the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975, based on notices allegedly issued under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 circa 1960. The Supreme Court held that vesting requires strict statutory compliance: notices must be personally served (not merely published), objections must be heard, and a final notification must be issued—mere issuance without service is insufficient. The Court reaffirmed that "live" notices pursued reasonably close to the 1975 appointed day vest property; stale, long-dormant notices do not. It rejected the High Court's attempt to sidestep binding precedent through immaterial distinctions based on whether appellants were subsequent purchasers or original owners. All 96 appeals were allowed; impugned mutations were quashed. The State may pursue fresh proceedings in lawful compliance with statutory procedure."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.