Order On Board

23.11.2021

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :-

“(i) That, the Hon'ble Court may issue appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions, quashing clause 7 (ii) of the impugned 2016 Guidelines dated 11-11-2016 issued by Respondent No. 1 (Annexure P/1) and consequential notification bearing no. F 19-51/Va/ 10-2/2005 (Part) dated 13-

08-2021 (Annexure P/2) issued by Respondent No. 2 and show cause notice dated 18-10-2021 (Annexure P/3).

(ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may issue appropriate writ directing the SLC/expert committee (Respondent No. 4) to decide the optimum distance for establishment of saw mills from protected and notified area for the State of Chhattisgarh as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of WPC No. 202/95 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India.

(iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the decision taken by the SLC/Expert Committee (Respondent No. 4) in the year 2016-17 which relates to the recommendation of the distance and establishment of the Saw Mills.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that pursuant to the guideline issued in the case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India & Ors. in WPC No. 202/98, initially a notification was made by the Expert Committee and thereafter by the State Government which had fixed the aerial distance of 10 kms and within the periphery of forest, the operation of the Wood Based Industries have been prohibited. It is contended that pursuant thereto the show cause notice was issued by the State on 18-10-2021 to the petitioner. It is further contended that as per the guideline issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (hereinafter referred to as 'MoEFCC'), the restriction on location of wood based industries as per clause-7(ii), the 10 kms of aerial distance from the boundary of nearest notified forests and protected areas was notified. It is stated that as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court's guideline, it was for the SLC who should have decided the optimum distance on which such restriction can be placed. Since the notice is served with decision already arrived at hearing would be a mere formality. As such, the notification of the Union of India dated 11-11-2016 (Annexure P/1) and the consequential notification dated 13-08-2021 (Annexure P/2) and the show cause notice dated 18-10-2021 be quashed as it is against the Hon'ble Supreme Court guideline and is issued arbitrarily.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel oppose the argument and would submit that the directions have been issued pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 05-10-2015 and as per the guideline, the MoEF is authorised to issue the appropriate guideline to decide the distance for establishing a Wood Based Industry near a forest. It is submitted that further the order purport that the person aggrieved by the decision taken by the SLC may filed an appeal before the MoEFCC seeking appropriate relief and thereafter may approach the concerned Court, therefore this petition against show cause notice would not be maintainable.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties on admission.

5. The order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 05-10-2015 in the matter of T.N.

Godavarman Thirumulpad (supra) is perused. The relevant consideration with the guideline which was issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is reproduced hereinbelow :-

“(iii) The MoEF is authorized to issue appropriate guidelines in conformation with the orders and directions issued by this Court and also the existing guidelines to the SLCs relating to assessment of timber availability for wood-based industries and grant of license/permission to the wood-based industries including addition of new machineries and also utilization of amount