Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
CitationAIR 1997 SC 3297, (1997) 8 SCC 191
CourtSupreme Court of India
Date11 July 1997
Year1997
BenchK. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmad, G.B. Pattanaik JJ.
Acts/ArticlesFifth Schedule, Article 21, AP Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation
CategoryConstitutional Law, Haryana-Specific

Key Principle Established

Transfer of tribal land to non-tribals including mining companies is prohibited in Scheduled Areas. Right to livelihood of tribals is not mere survival but life with dignity.

Brief Facts

Samatha, an NGO, challenged the grant of mining leases to private companies in Scheduled Areas of Andhra Pradesh, arguing it violated the prohibition on transfer of tribal land to non-tribals.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that transfer of tribal land in Scheduled Areas to non-tribals, including mining companies, is prohibited. The right to livelihood of tribals is not mere survival but includes living with dignity. Mining leases granted to private companies in violation of land transfer regulations are void.

Impact & Significance

This judgment protected tribal land rights across India and is cited in all cases involving mining in Scheduled Areas. It established that corporate interests cannot override the constitutional protection of tribal lands.

Tags & Related Topics

Constitutional Law Haryana-Specific Fifth Schedule Article 21 AP Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation
← Previous Judgment Sahara India Real Estate v. SEBI
Next Judgment → Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India

Related Judgments

1984

Neeraja Chaudhary v. State of M.P.

(1984) 3 SCC 243

Release of bonded labourers without rehabilitation is cruelty. The State must ensure identification, release AND rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

Read Analysis
1986

Sheela Barse v. Union of India

(1986) 3 SCC 632

Children cannot be kept in jails. Directions issued for establishment of juvenile courts, children's homes, and appointment of duty counsel…

Read Analysis
1993

Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa

AIR 1993 SC 1960

State is liable to pay compensation for custodial death as a public law remedy under Article 32/226, independent of any…

Read Analysis

Disclaimer

This judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).

Need Case Law Research or Legal Representation?

22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.

Call: +919915442266 WhatsApp

Need Legal Assistance?

Contact Advocate Ravinder Singh Dhull for expert legal guidance on your matter.