The court permitted land deletion under S.4 of the Forest Act while leaving conditions affecting rights of intervening parties open for future examination.

1. List the matter next Friday.
Item 301

2. IA No. 15 was earlier filed on behalf of the State of U.P. seeking permission for the construction of an irrigation project covering an area of 180.79 (sic). The prayer was allowed by this Court subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions.

3. The learned counsel appearing for tits State of U.P. submitted that Condition 2 requiring shifting of the villages is causing difficulties to the State, therefore, sought permission to seek variation of that condition before the National Board for Wildlife. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the National Board for Wildlife has submitted that if such an application is preferred within two weeks, the same would be considered in the next meeting and the decision will be placed before this Court on the next hearing date.

4. Prayer granted. Post after six weeks.
Item 302

5. The State of Gujarat has filed an application before the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) seeking permission to delete 2105.4241 ha of forest area in 57 villages in four districts of Gujarat State under S.4 of the Forest Act , 1927 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), details of which are furnished along with the application. CEC placed that application with a report before this Court seeking appropriate orders on the request made by the State of Gujarat.

6. CEC in its report dated 23-6-2010 endorsed the deletion of the areas approved by the Forest Settlement Officer after acknowledging the rights of the villagers in response to the areas notified under S.4 of the Act. Further it was also reported that the areas have by and large been decided to be excluded on genuine grounds as mentioned in the abovementioned Act. CEC however, imposed the following conditions:
1. No area will be deleted on the ground of its allotment having been done after the issuance of notifications under S.4 of the Forest Act ;
2. None of the deleted area will be allowed to be used for raining without obtaining approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act , 1980;
3. For deletion of the area approval under the , 1980 will be obtained. However, no NPV or compensatory afforestation charges will be payable as the areas are to be deleted for settlement of rights as per the provisions of the Forest Act , 1927; and
4. The balance areas will be notified as reserved forest under S.20 of the Forest Act , 1927.

7. Being aggrieved by Condition 2, stated hereinbefore, ABG Cement Ltd. has approached this Court seeking intervention and stated that its rights are effected by Condition 2 suggested in the CEC Report.

8. Mr. Andhyarujina, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the intervener submitted that ABG Cement Ltd. had made an application before the Government of Gujarat for the grant of the mining lease in certain tracts of barren land aggregating 730.60 ha of land in Village Nani Ber for limestone mining. Further it is stated that after the order passed by the Forest Settlement Officer, the State of Gujarat has granted approval to ABG Cement Ltd. for limestone mining of 730.60 ha of land in Village Nani Ber and by Letter dated 30-6-2007 called upon ABG Cement Ltd. to make the payment of Rs.32,94,500 towards the prospecting charges.

9. The learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that once the land is deleted from the proposed forest under S.4 following the procedure under S.11 of the Act, such land ceased to be forest land and therefore provisions of S.2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act , 1980 do not apply and there is no requirement of obtaining prior approval of the Central Government under that Act. The learned Senior Counsel has submitted that CEC has wrongly relied upon the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) guidelines, which was annexed as Annexure R - 4 and state