H.L. Dattu, C.J.

The judgment of the learned single Judge in W.P.(C)No.33212 of 2007 dated 14th January, 2008 is the subject matter of this Writ Appeal.

2. Thepetitioner with an intention to commence a "furniture unit" has submitted an application before the officials of the Forest Department for grant of "No Objection Certificate"(for short NOC), to produce the same before the Industries Department to obtain permission to commence his furniture unit. In the application so filed, it is stated that there is no forest land within the radius of 5 Kms from the proposed site and that there is no restriction for grant of No Objection Certificate by the Forest Department.

3. After receipt of the application so filed by the petitioner, the Divisional Forest Officer, Nenmmara, Palakkad District has issued Ext.P3 order directing the petitioner to submit the application before the Central Empowered Committee. It is this order (Ext.P3) was questioned by the petitioner before this Court. This Court, while entertaining the Writ Petition had issued notice to the respondents. After receipt of the notice, the respondents have filed detailed counter affidavit stating that in terms of the Supreme Court order, no State Government or Union Territory will permit the opening of any sawmills , veneer or plywood industry without prior permission of the Central Empowered Committee. In the counter affidavit, they have also relied on Annexure R2(b) order passed by the Government of Kerala wherein it is stated that for all wood-based industries, clearance should be obtained from the Central Empowered Committee .

4. The learned single Judge keeping in view the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court and also orders passed by the State Government, has not taken exception to Ext. P3 order passed by the Divisional Forest Officer. Accordingly, the learned single Judge has rejected the Writ Petition. That is how, the petitioner in the Writ Petition has presented this Writ Appeal.

5. Shri K. Anand, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the petitioner intends to commence a "furniture unit". May be that unit is a wood based industry and even then also, since the petitioners unit is not situated within the radius of 5 Kms from the forest area, the petitioner need not have to obtain No Objection Certificate from the Central Empowered Committee.

6. Per contra, Shri Renjith Thampan, learned Special Government Pleader for Forest, would submit that the Central Empowered Committee had constituted a Sub-Committee to look into the various aspects of the wood based industries in Kerala. It is further stated that the Sub-Committee, after having a detailed discussion, has submitted a report to the Central Empowered Committee and that they are awaiting for the response from the Central Empowered Committee. Learned Counsel, therefore, submits that for the present, the Divisional Forest Officer is justified in issuing Ext. P3 order. Learned Counsel has also produced before us the relevant papers regarding the constitution of the Sub-Committee by the Central Empowered Committee and the reference made by the Central Empowered Committee to the Sub-Committee to deal with certain aspects of the matter and the report of the sub-committee to the Central Empowered Committee.

7. TheCentral Empowered Committee which was constituted by the Apex Court by its order dated 28.02.2006, had constituted a Sub-Committee consisting of Shri K. Balachandran Thampi, Addl. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests as the Chairman of the Sub-Committee and Shri N.V. Trivedi Babu, Chief Conservator of Forests (Protection) and a representative of the Director General of Forests for the following purposes:

"(a) to assess the timber availability, before establishing of any new wood-based industries in Kerala after taking into consideration details of existing licensed wood-based industries, their installed capacity, total timber required by them and timber available from governmen