HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
JHANAKRAM RATHORE – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WPC 5052/2021
['VAISHALI MAHILONG', '', 'MANOJ PARANJPE', 'VAIBHAV A GOVERDHAN', 'Anurag Singh', 'Prasoon Agrawal', 'Bharat Sharma', 'ANSHUL TIWARI', 'SHUBHANK TIWARI', 'VIVEK MISHRA', 'ASSTT S G', '', 'A G']
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 5052 of 2021
Jhanakram Rathore S/o Late Shri Roopnarayan Rathore Aged About 56
Years R/o Village Sivni, Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1.
Union Of India Ministry Of Environment Forest And Climate Change-
Through Its Secretary, New Delhi
2.
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Forest
And Climate Change, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur,
Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3.
Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest, Chhattisgarh, Aranya Bhawan
Sector- 19, North Block, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh
4.
State Level Committee Chhattisgarh Under Wood Based Industries
Guidelines, Through Its Member Secretary, Aranya Bhawan Sector-
19, North Block, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh
5.
Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Licencing Authority, Janjgir-Champa,
District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
----Respondents
For Petitioner
:
Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate along with
Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate
For Respondent No.1
:
Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate on
behalf of Asstt. S.G.
For State
:
Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
08/12/2021
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
2
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 gratn 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
3
the show cause notice dated 18.10.2021 be quashed as it is against
the Hon'ble Supreme Court guideline and is i