JUDGMENT :

A.M. Bujor Barua, J.

Heard Mr. V Rajkhowa, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. RK Bora, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 and 12 respectively being the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Home and Political Department, the Director General of Police, Assam, The Principal Secretary, Department of Tourism, Government of Assam and the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M), Mr. SM Hasan, learned counsel for the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 respectively being the Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Environment and Forest, Government of Assam, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and the Divisional Forest Officer, Guwahati Wildlife Division, Mr. A Borpujari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 9 being the Managing Director, Assam Tourism Development Corporation Limited and Mr. S Bora, learned counsel for the respondents No. 10 and 11 being the authorities under the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority.

2. The petitioner No. 1 Sri Dwijen Bhattacharya is a senior citizen as well as a businessman by profession and also the President of the Zoo Narengi Tiniali Byabashayee Committee and General Secretary of Geetamandir Bachao Committee, whereas the petitioner No. 2 Sri Rajesh Sarma is also a businessman and General Secretary of Brihatar Zoo Narengi Ancholik Unnayan Samiti. The Zoo Narengi Road (subsequently renamed as Mother Teresa Road) in the city of Guwahati connects the Radha Govinda Barua Road with NGB Try junction at the locality called Forest Gate.

3. Although the area in and around the both sides of the Zoo Narengi road are thickly populated residential areas, but adjacent to the Zoo Narengi road towards the eastern side exists a hill in the name of Gita Mandir Hill. There exists a Temple at the top of the Gita Mandir Hill which is called the Gita Mandir. But from the level of the plains area up to the top of the hill comprising of the Temple, the entire area is thickly covered forest area. The petitioners also place a satellite photo of the Gita Mandir Hill, which itself makes it discernible that from the level of the plain area from which the hill exist, except for the very small portion comprising of the Gita Mandir Temple, the rest of the area comprises of thick forest and no construction of any kind had been undertaken over the hill as revealed by the photograph as well as, as admitted by the respondents.

4. The petitioners institute this public interest litigation (in short PIL) on the premise that the aforesaid forest area is the only surviving green area in the locality and also one of the very few green areas that are yet to be destroyed within the city of Guwahati and therefore, have raised a public cause that it would be in the interest of the public if the forest area is retained and not converted to any other non-forest area including commercial ventures.

5. The State of Assam through the Revenue Department has stated that as per the land records, the entire Gita Mandir Hill area comprises of revenue land and no settlement had been made to any person over the land of the Gita Mandir Hill even under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, 1886 except for a small portion on the top of the hill where the land had been allotted to the Gita Samaj where the Gita Mandir Temple presently exists.

6. In course of the deliberation before the Court even the Environment and Forest Department of the Government of Assam on principle is agreeable that if the surviving forest area in the Gita Mandir Hill can be preserved, it would be in the greater public interest and by taking such stand, the respondents in the Environment and Forest Department are in agreement with the cause raised by the petitioners in this PIL petition.

7. It is heartening to note the stand of the Environment and Forest Department of the Government of Assam, which no doubt has to be accepted to be