Back
2012 Supreme(SC) 2712
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.S. Radhakrishnan, Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, JJ.
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others - Respondents
I.A. Nos. 2421-2422 in W.P.(C) No. 202 of 1995 with 302. I.A. Nos. 3344-3345 in W.P.(C) No. 20211995, 303. I.A. Nos. 3142-3203 and 3213-14, 3217-3238, 3242-3267 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 304. I.A. Nos. 3346 in LA. No. 2335 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 305. I.A. No. 3109 (C) Con.P.(C) No. 241/2011 in I.A. No. 1631 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 306. I.A. Nos. 3118-3120 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 307. I.A. Nos. 2870-2871 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 308. I.A. Nos. 3311-3313 in W.C.(C) No. 202/1995, 309. I A. Nos. 3133 and 3134 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 310. I.A. Nos. 3047-3048 in W.P.(C) No. 202/ 1995, 311. I.A. Nos. 3302-3304 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 312. I.A. Nos. 2465-2466, 2467-2468 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, 313. SLP(C) No. 33261/2011, 314. SLP(C)..CC. 19672/2011, 315. SLP(C) No. 20154/2011. SLP(C) No. 1666812011, SLP(C) No. 21460/2011, SLP(C) No. 21463-21464/2011, SLP(C) No. 21461/2011, SLP(C) No 17150-17151/2011, SLP(C) No. 17155-17156/2011, SLP(C) No. 17160/2011. SLP(C) No. 17313-17314/2011, SLP(C) No. 21467/2011, SLP(C) No. 21469/2011, SLP(C) No. 21480/2011, SLP(C) No. 21468/2011. SLP(C) No. 21472/2011, SLP(C) No. 21470/2011, SLP(C) No. 21477/2011, SLP(C) No. 21478/2011, SLP(C) No. 31581/2011, SLP(C) No. 30535/2011, SLP(C) No. 30536/2011, SLP(C)..CC. 15351/2011, SLP(C) CC. 19722/2011, SLP(C) No. 25010/2011, SLP(C) No. 5176/2012, SLP(C) No. 2666/2012, SLP(C) No. 7619/2012, 322. SLP(C) No. 19112/2011, 316. I.A. No. 100 in W.P.(C) No. 337/1995, 317. I.A. No. 2469 with I.A. Nos. 2782, 2939-2940 and I.A. Nos. 3023-3024 in I.A. 2782, 3030 and 3032 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, W.P.(C) No. 130/2011, 318. I.A. Nos. 1308, 1323, 1455, 1468, 1478 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, SLP(C) 30622/2011, 319. I.A. Nos. 2785, 3025 and 3390 in W.P.(C) 202/1995, 320. I.A. No. 3402 in I.A. No. 2378 in W.P.(C) 202/1995, 321. I.A. No. 21/2012 in I.A. No. 16/2009 in W.P.(C) 47/1998.
Decided On : 12-3-2012
Headnote:
The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980- Granted Permission To Establish Saw Mill - Wood based units - It is located in a Government approved Industrial Estates within a distance of 10 kms from nearby forest and wherein establishment of wood based industries is presently not permissible - Applicant unit was not granted the saw mill licence after complying background it is submitted that this may consider directing to consider grant of licence/renewal in favour of the Applicant – Held, grant of permission to establish saw mill within the approved industrial estates irrespective of the distance from the boundary of nearby forest and without obtaining concurrence from the CEC -The concerned officers of the State of Madhya Pradesh as well as the MoEF are not present in the Court with the original files-The importance is inclined to direct the State as well as the MoEF to ensure the presence of a senior rank officer who is conversant with the facts of the case, with the original files including all the reports submitted by the experts, the records of the National Board of Wildlife on the issue on the next date of hearing- Application allowed.
ORDER :
301. I.A. Nos. 2421-2422 in W.P.(C) No. 202 of 1995:
1. List on 19.3.2012.
302. l.A. Nos. 3344-3345 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
2. List on 26.3.2012.
303. I.A. Nos. 3142-3203 and 3213-14, 3217-3238,3242-3267 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
3. List after two weeks.
304. I.A. Nos. 3346 in I.A. No. 2335 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
4. The application is disposed of in view of the report of the CEC dated 9th March, 2012 subject to the conditions mentioned in paragraph 3 of the report which are incorporated hereunder:
"(a) approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for use of the forest land will be obtained;
(b) payment of NPV at the applicable rates will be made; and
(c) strict compliance of the conditions stipulated by the National Board of Wildlife will be strictly complied with."
5. The applicant has to get further permission under the Forest Conservation Act.
305. I.A. No. 3109 (@ Con.P.(C) No. 241/2011 in I.A. No. 1631 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
6. This application is preferred seeking a direction to Respondent No.6 to revoke the order dated 4.5.2011 directing to keep the licence in abeyance and also for further consequential relief. CEC has filed its report on 9/3/2012 which reads as follows:
"4. It is submitted that the Applicant saw cum veneer mill is one of the wood based units in respect of which NOC has been issued by the Forest Department. It is located in a Government approved Industrial Estates within a distance of 10 kms. from the nearby forest and wherein the establishment of wood based industries is presently not permissible. The applicant unit was not granted the saw mill licence after complying with this Hon'ble Court's orders dated 30.10.2002 and 23rd April, 2010. The SLC in its meeting held on 9th November, 2010 has taken a stand that grant of permission to establish saw mill within the Government approved industrial estates irrespective of the distance from the boundary of the nearby forest and without obtaining concurrence from the CEC was not in accordance with the law.
5. In the above background it is submitted that this Hon'ble court may consider directing the State of Karnataka to consider grant of licence/renewal in favour of the Applicant after (a) the seniority List of all the similarly placed units is finalised (b) a decision regarding the distance from the boundary of the forest wherein wood based industries are to be allowed to establish/continue is taken by the State of Karnataka and (c) subject to timber availability after meeting the requirement of the existing licensed wood-based industries in the State."
7. In the light of the report of the CEC dated 9.3.2012 we are inclined to dispose of the application directing the 6th respondent to consider the prayer of the applicant and it is also open to the applicant to file objections, if any, to the report before the 6th respondent and the same has also to be taken note of and pass appropriate order within three months in accordance with law.
8. The 6th respondent also take note of the order passed by this Court dated 23rd April 2010 which is produced as annexure P.1 along with this application.
9. The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.
306. I.A. Nos. 3118-312QWn W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
10. Four weeks' time is granted to the State of Gujarat to file its reply.
307. I.A. Nos. 2870-2871 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
11. Liberty is granted to the applicant to file its reply affidavit within two weeks.
308. I.A. Nos. 3311-3313 in W.C.(C) No. 202/1995:
12. List on 19.3.2012.
13. In the meantime counter affidavit be filed.
309. I.A. Nos. 3133&3134 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
14. List after two weeks.
310. I.A. Nos. 3047-3048 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
15. List after two weeks.
311. I.A. Nos. 3302-3304 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
16. List after three weeks to enable the learned counsel for the State to examine whether any State Level Committee has been constituted under the local Act.
312. I.A. Nos. 2465-2466, 2467-2468 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995:
17. List after three weeks.
313. SLP(C) No. 33261/
