SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Kar) 235

High Court of Karnataka
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.G. SABHAHIT
M/s. MSPL limited, Rep. by its Vice President (CC& L), K.R.M Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Karnataka Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Forest, Bangalore & Others - Respondent
Decided on : 01-04-2009
Writ Petition No. 60023 of 2009

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Krishnan Venugopal, Senior Advocate, for M.M. Swamy, Advocate. For the Respondents:Udaya Holla, Advocate General.

Headnote:CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 - Section 482: [P.D.Dinakaran, C.J. & V.G.Sabhahit,J] Quashing of FIR - Powers of High Court - Complaint as to violation of conditions of agreement - Evidence is yet to be collected and produced before Court - Respondents were prepared to substantiate violation of conditions by petitioner - Held, Powers of High Court cannot be invoked to stifle legitimate prosecution. FIR cannot be quashed at this stage.

       CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - Article 226: [P.D.Dinakaran, C.J. & V.G.Sabhahit,J] Quashing of FIR - Powers of High Court - Complaint as to violation of conditions of agreement - Evidence is yet to be collected and produced before Court - Respondents were prepared to substantiate violation of conditions by petitioner - Held, Powers of High Court cannot be invoked to stifle legitimate prosecution. FIR cannot be quashed at this stage.

Judgment :

1) The petitioner, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 is a lessee under the current mining lease for mining iron ore (M L No.2416) over an extent of 350.78 Hectares. Out of 350.78 hectares covering Sy.Nos. 1, 4 ,5 and 6 of Vyasanakere village, Hospet Taluk, Bellary District, an extent of 347.22 hectares was leased out for mining activities and the remaining 3.56 hectares was demarcated for road.

2 )The said mining lease was granted originally in the year 1952 by the then Government of Madras for 10 years to one K.Narayanaiah and subsequently transferred in favour of the petitioner herein in the year 1962 and got renewed for 20 years each time with effect from 14.11.1962, 14.11.1982 and 14.11.2002. The petitioner, admittedly obtained clearance from the concerned forest authorities as contemplated under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 vide the proceedings dated 8.3.2007 of the Government of India and the Government of Karnataka has also accorded approval for the lease by proceedings dated 23.3.2007.

3)With this background, the petitioner entered into an Agreement dated 19.4.2007 with the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bellary Division, Bellary representing the Government of Karnataka, viz., the fourth respondent, and the relevant clauses of the Agreement are extracted hereunder:

“1. xxx

2.xxx

3. xxx

4. Fencing, protection and regeneration of the safety Zone area (7.5 metres strip all along the outer boundary of the mining lease area) shall be done at the project cost. Besides this, afforestation on degraded forest land, to be selected elsewhere, measuring one and a half times the area under safety Zone, shall also be done at the project cost.

5. xxx

6. xxx

7.xxx

8. The User agency shall take up planting work on the static dumps during the advance

mining operations.

9. No damage to the flora and fauna of the area shall be caused.

10. xxx

11. xxx

12. The mining lease area shall be demarcated on ground at the project cost, using four feet high RCC pillars, with each pillar inscribed with the serial number, forward and backward bearings and distances between two adjacent pillars.

13. The forest land shall not be used for any purpose other than that specified in the proposal.

14. xxx

15. xxx

16. xxx

17. xxx

18. The lease shall undertake to protect rigidly the leased area and forest area surrounding the area up to one Km from the leased area.

19. xxx

20. xxx

21. xxx

22. xxx

23. In case of violation of agreement conditions, the State Government (Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment) shall have right to suspend the mining activities.”

1.1) While approving the scheme of mining by proceeding dated 30.4.2007, the Controller of Mines (SZ), Indian Bureau of Mines, Bangalore, under the control of Department of Mines, Central Government, has imposed the condition that the petitioner shall dump the overburden waste only within an area of 37.32 Hectares during 2006-07; within an area of 40.15 Hectares during the next 5 years ending on 31.3.2012 and the same shall not extended during the rest of the periods.

2.1) When the petitioner was mining thus, the fourth Respondent- Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bellary Division, by proceedings dated 29.12.2008, which is impugned in the present Writ petition, referring to the letter of the Assistant Conservator of Forests dated 15.12.2008 and the letter of the Range Forest Officer, Hospet, even dated, observed that:

“1. The user agency M/s Mineral Sales Private Limited, Hosapete not properly marked their leased mining area, up to the border mark fixed area not installed the prescribed concrete poles for every 20 meters distance and not marked number on the poles, not mentioned Forward and Backward bearing, as it is safety zone area, therefore unable to identify 7.5 meters measurement script and border gunta, it is violation of condition NO.4 and No.12 of the agreement;

2. The user agency in Vyasanakere forest area during its mining activities to dump th












































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top