N.P.SINGH, J.

1. This application has been filed for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent-Divisional Forest Officer, not to interfere with the mining operation carried on by the petitioners in the area which is part and parcel of his lease-hold.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that a mining lease in respect of the area in question had been granted previously to M/s. India Fire Bricks and Insulation Company Private Limited. On the basis of that lease, the aforesaid Company did mining operation in the aforesaid area for a number of years. Thereafter the lease in their favour was terminated and fresh advertisement was made for grant of the mining lease. The petitioner applied for the grant of a lease covering a total area of 415.45 acres of land. The State of Bihar sanctioned the grant of the lease, by its order dated 18-5-1983, for a period of 20 years, for mining Fire Clay in the said area. The Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh executed a deed of lease on 25th July, 1983 in favour of the petitioner. The District Mining Officer, Hazaribagh is said to have demarcated the aforesaid area of 415.45 acres and delivered possession to the petitioner on 30-9-1983. The petitioner claims to have started mining operation. However, the Divisional Forest Officer started interfering with the mining operation carried on by the petitioner and threatened to take coercive action. The Divisional Forest Officer issued letter dt. 14-1-1984 to all the Forest Range Officers under him directing them not to allow the petitioner to carry on the mining operations, in the areas leased to the petitioner by the State Government, which was within reserved forest.

3. The stand of the respondent-Divisional Forest Officer appears to be that after the promulgation of the Forest (Conservation) Ordinance, 1980 with effect from 25-10-1980 which was replaced by the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), any forest land cannot be used for non-forest purpose, except with the prior approval of the Central Government.

As the lease in question had been granted to the petitioner covering even the reserved forest, without the prior approval of the Central Government, the petitioner was not entitled to carry on any mining operation in that portion of the lease-hold, which is part of the reserved forest area.

4. Sec.2 of the Act is as follows :-

"2. Restriction on the dereservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purpose. - Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force in a State, no State Government or other authority shall make except with the prior approval of the Central Government, any order directing. (i) that any reserved forest (within the meaning of the expression "reserved forest" in any law for the time being in force in that State) or any portion thereof, shall cease to be reserved :

(ii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be used for any non-forest purpose.

Explanation.- For the purposes of this Section "non-forest purpose" means breaking up or clearing of any forest land or portion thereof for any purpose other than re-afforestation."

In view of the clear and unambiguous provisions contained in S.2 read with Explanation thereof, without prior approval of the Central Government, State Government or any other authority cannot direct that any forest or any portion thereof may be used for any non-forest purpose. From the statement of object and reasons of the Act it appears that with a view to checking further deforestation which causes ecological imbalance and leads to environmental deterioration, it was decided to frame the Act in question making encumbent on the State Government to seek prior approval from the Central Government for dereservation of reserved forest and for use of forest land for non-forest purpose.

5. From the language of S.2 of the Act it appears that the bar placed on the power of the State Government to make order to deserves reserve