1. Forest land demarcation status — Establishment of industrial estates for wood-based industries — Refund of deposits. (Para 1 , 2 , 5 , 6 , 11 )
Back
Next 
1999 Supreme(SC) 518
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A. S. Anand, CJI., B. N. Kirpal, V. N. Khare, JJ.
T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD, PETITIONER
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
IA No. 397 in Writ Petition (C) No. 202 of 1995 with Contempt Petition No. 336 in IA No. 397 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995 with IA No. 258 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995 with IA No. 259 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995,
decided on April 16, 1999.
Notifications regarding industrial estates in forest areas must be issued in consultation with the central environment ministry. Compliance with such directions through the publication of a valid notification resolves allegations of contempt of court.
Headnote:(A) Environmental Law - Compliance with court directions regarding forest land and industrial estates - Necessity of consultation with the central environment ministry for notifications affecting forest land - Notification issued by a state government without such consultation is contrary to court directions (Paras 5-6).
(B) Contempt of Court - Rectification of non-compliance - Where the state government complies with the court's directions by issuing the required notifications, the contempt petition is liable to be dismissed without further opinion on the allegations (Para 12).
Facts of the case:
A commissioner was appointed to report on the status of a reserve forest. It was subsequently alleged via a news report that the demarcation of said forest land was stopped by a state minister. Separately, a state government had issued a notification regarding industrial estates without consulting the central environment ministry, which was in violation of previous court directions. The state government later submitted a revised draft notification for the establishment of industrial and minor industrial estates.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the revised draft notification for industrial estates had been examined by the central government and was in order. Regarding the stoppage of forest demarcation, the court required the state government to file a response to the allegations.
Issues: Whether the state government's failure to consult the central ministry rendered the notification invalid and whether the subsequent submission of a corrected notification resolves the contempt of court.
Ratio Decidendi: Compliance with court-mandated procedures, specifically the requirement to consult the relevant central ministry for environmental notifications, is mandatory. Once the state government rectifies the non-compliance by publishing a valid notification in accordance with the law and court orders, the grounds for a contempt petition are extinguished.
Result: Notice issued to the state government regarding forest demarcation; notification for industrial estates approved for publication with a requirement for a follow-up report after three months; contempt petition dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Alleged stoppage of forest demarcation by executive order — Non-consultation with the Ministry of Environment and Forests regarding industrial estate notifications. (Para 2 , 5 )
3. Notifications issued without consulting the Ministry of Environment and Forests violate court directions; subsequent draft notifications establishing industrial estates were found to be in order. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. State notifications concerning industrial estates must be issued in consultation with the Ministry of Environment and Forests to satisfy judicial mandates. (Para 5 , 6 )
5. Notice issued for forest demarcation; industrial estate notification approved; contempt petition dismissed; notice issued for refund of deposits. (Para 2 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 )
6. What is the requirement for state notifications regarding industrial estates in forest areas?
Notifications must be issued in consultation with the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, to ensure compliance with court directions. (Para 5 , 6 )
7. How does the court address executive interference in forest land demarcation?
The court may issue notices to the state government to respond to allegations that the demarcation of forest land was stopped by a minister. (Para 2 )
8. When can a contempt petition be dismissed without an opinion on the allegations?
A contempt petition may be dismissed when the state's subsequent compliance with court orders, such as publishing a draft notification, renders the petition unnecessary. (Para 12 )
ORDER
IA No. 276
1. On 29-7-1998, we had appointed Mr. R. M. N. Sahai, Conservator of Forests, as the Commissioner of the Court and directed him to immediately go to Thatkola Reserve Forest and submit a report about the present state of affairs in that forest. Learned counsel for the State of Karnataka had assured the Court that the State would offer all possible assistance to Mr. Sahai to undertake the task assigned by the Court to enable him to file the status report. The report has now been filed by Mr. Sahai and subsequently he has also filed a supplementary affidavit to update the main report. Copy of the same has been furnished to learned amicus. The matter shall come up for further direction on the next date for considering the report.
2. Our attention has been drawn to a news item under the caption "Demarcation of Thatkola forest land stopped, says Minister" which appeared in Deccan Herald of 12-1-1999. A perusal of the news item shows that ongoing demarcation of the Thatkola forest land, which was being carried out by the Forest and the Survey of India Departments, has been stopped under orders of a Minister of the State of Karnataka. Issue a notice to the State of Karnataka to file its response to the allegations contained in the news item, copy of which shall be sent along with the notice to the State. The State may also file their comments to the report of Mr. Sahai in the meanwhile.
3. A copy of the news item shall also be served along with the notice on the Standing Counsel for the State of Karnataka.
4. List the matter on 7-5-1999 before a Bench presided over by Honble B. N. Kirpal, J.
IA No. 397
5. On 10-12-1998, this Court had observed that the notification dated 15-6-1998 issued by the Government of Nagaland, without consulting the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India ran in the teeth of the directions issued by this Court. Subsequently, an affidavit was filed by the Government of Nagaland on 15-1-1999. From that affidavit it appeared that the Government of Nagaland had not declared industrial estates as contemplated by the orders made by this Court. The matter was adjourned, at the request of learned counsel for the Government of Nagaland.
6. An affidavit dated 22-2-1999 was filed on 23-2-1999 along with a draft notification, including Annexure A, stating that industrial estates and minor industrial estates have now been established by the Government of Nagaland. The location of those estates has been indicated in the notification. The learned Additional Solicitor General, Mr. K. N. Rawal, appearing for the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India submits that the declaration of the industrial estates and minor industrial estates as contained in the annexure to the draft notification has been examined by the Union of India and found to be in order.
7. With the publication of this draft notification, the matter is now given a quietus.
8. Let the notification be published. The Government of Nagaland shall act strictly in accordance with the notification. A follow-up report shall be filed by the State after three months from the date of the publication of the notification disclosing the status of the shifting of wood-based industries in the industrial estates/minor industrial estates.
9. The application is disposed of.
IA No. 258
10. Issue notice.
IA No. 259
11. Notice shall issue confined to prayer b which reads thus :
"(b) direct the District Magistrate to refund the amount deposited by the applicant herein with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of payment till its realisation."
Contempt Petition No. 336 of 1998
12. Vide our order of even date, we have permitted the Government of Nagaland to publish the draft notification creating industrial/minor industrial estates in obedience to our orders. In view of the order made by us in IA No. 397, no orders are required to be made in this petition. The contempt petition is accordingly dismissed and consigned to reco
