SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, VIKRAM NATH, JJ.
In Re : T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India And Ors. & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 202 Of 1995 with C.A. No(s). 9206 of 2022
Decided On : 24-03-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. order for fresh survey and report (Para 1 , 2 , 7) |
| 2. delay in processing tree felling applications (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. need for younger experts in cec (Para 6 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. statutory clearances required for constructions (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. role of the cec in court decisions (Para 12) |
ORDER :
I.A. Nos. 52897-98 of 2021 and I.A. No. 61361 of 2021
1. The application for impleadment is allowed.
2. By way of these applications, the applicant(s) seek following prayer:
3. It is the grievance of the applicant that though the applicant(s) had applied for permission to fell the Khair trees and their applications were duly recommended by the revenue authorities, there was delay in forwarding the same to the District Forest Officer (in short “DFO”), on account of such delay, the DFO has not granted them permission.
4. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, learned counsel for the State submits that vide Management Plan dated 26.04.2016 and Rules notified vide notification/SRO-111 dated 31.03.2016, which were issued in pursuance to the order passed by this Court dated 16.09.2013, a specific time-frame was fixed during which the applications were to be made. He submits that admittedly the applications made by the applicant(s) were not made within the prescribed time.
5. He, however, fairly concedes that since the time-frame was being framed for the first time, there was no proper publication of the said guidelines.
6. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the matter, we find that it will be appropriate that the applications be considered afresh.
7. We, therefore, direct the revenue authorities to make a fresh survey and submit their report to the DFO within a period of four weeks from today.
8. On such a report being submitted, the DFO, DRC Division shall take a decision with regard to grant of permission to the applicant(s) for felling of Khair trees.
9. We clarify that we are not observing anything on the merits of the matter and the concerned authority would consider the application(s) made by each applicant, on their own merits.
10. The applications are disposed of accordingly.
I.A. No. 87648 of 2020 alongwith CEC Report No. 15/2023 in I.A. No. 3840/14 (disposed of) and I.A. Nos. 132905 of 2022 in I.A. No. 2370 of 2007 (disposed of)
As prayed, list these applications on 10.05.2023.
I.A. Nos. 31095, 31104 and 31118 of 2019 with I.A. Nos. 59646 of 2021, 43308 of 2022
In view of letter circulated by Mr. Shamshad, learned counsel for the applicant(s) seeking adjournment for filing affidavit, list this matter after four weeks.
I.A. Nos. 196062 and 174896 of 2019 alongwith CEC Report No. 11/2023
1. Vide order dated 24.02.2023, we have considered I.A. No.196062 & 174896/2019 filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we have passed the following order:
“Allow the present Application and permit the Applicant to construct a Convention Centre at Patnitop after demolishing the existing dilapidated Club Building of Jammu and Kashmir Tourism Development Corporation (JKTDC).” The application is allowed, subject to obtaining clearances from the Statutory Authorities concerned.”
3. After the order was passed, the Central Empowered Committee [in short “CEC”] has submitted its report on the present matter on 13.03.2023.
4. In the report, the CEC has stated that it is not in favour of permitting construction of Convention Centre at the proposed site. It has also proposed that Patnitop Development Authority may look for an alternative site outside forest area.
5. Mr. A.D.N. Rao, learned Amicus Curiae
The court emphasized that environmental protection must take precedence in decision-making for tree felling applications, requiring adherence to statutory clearances and rigorous mitigation measures.
Balancing developmental activities with environmental concerns is crucial under forest conservation laws.
Tree felling permission cannot be refused merely on pendency of land disputes without interim order or opportunity of hearing; competent authority must follow Section 5 procedure, verify possession, ....
The court emphasized the importance of procedural compliance and sustainable development principles in the context of environmental protection and development decisions.
The meaning of the word “forest” in the Act, it is obvious that prior approval of the central Government is required for any non-forest activity within the area of any “forest.”
Permission is required for cutting any tree in designated areas; definitions of 'tree' are context-dependent within relevant preservation laws.
Environmental Law - Unauthorized encroachment on forest land - Cancellation of any permission/Licences - Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Transfer of forest land to User Agency shall not....
Environmental Law - Unauthorized encroachment on forest land - Cancellation of any permission / Licences - Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Transfer of forest land to User Agency shall n....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.