Mrs. Suma R. Nayak vs Minister for Forest, Ecology And Environment And Ors

The counsel for the parties are present. Heard the counsel. This application is brought forth seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent to immediately stop and abort the project of construction of new Deputy Commissioner (DC) Office on forest land bearing Survey Nos.23/6a1, b2 & 223-4b, 23-12b, 23-6a, 2b, 23-6b and 23/3 at Padil, Mangalore and also for a further direction to the 4th respondent to take re- possession of the said land. The case of the applicant, in short, is that this application is filed under Section 14 of the NGT Act, 2010 in order to oppose the commencement of the project i.e. construction of new District Government Offices Complex which includes the DC Office by the 3rd respondent on the land allotted.

The land is situated in Survey No.23/6a1-b2, 23-4b, 23-12b, 23/6a2b, 23-6b and 23/3 totally measuring 5.89 acres and situated at Padil, Mangalore which has been categorised as Deemed Forest consisting of more than 478 trees, several species of wildlife and the proposed project would cause environmental degradation, ecological imbalance and also consequent damage. Hence, it has got to be restrained.

The respondents in their reply averred that the application is barred by limitation. The application originally challenged the allotment of the said land for the aforesaid purpose before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka where the Writ Petition was dismissed and having failed in their attempt, now filed this application knowing it well that it is unfounded and in order to make it appear as if the cutting of trees would cause environmental degradation and hence the application has no substance and the same has got to be dismissed.

All the averments made in the respective pleadings and also documentary evidence made available, were looked into and the arguments put forth by the respective counsel were also considered. In the considered opinion of the Tribunal, the contention put forth by the 3rd respondent that the application is hit from the point of view of limitation does not arise for consideration since the application is the one challenging allotment but the averments are made and it is also for granting relief restraining the respondent from cutting and felling of trees which the applicant brought to the notice of the Tribunal and it involves a substantial question concerned with environment and connected to ecology. Hence the contention of the respondent on the point of limitation cannot be countenanced. Hence it is rejected.

Admittedly the allotment of the land belonging to the 4th respondent, was made for construction of the District Government offices Complex including the DC office in Survey Nos.23/6a1-b2, 23-4b, 23-12b, 23/6b and 23/3, Padil, Mangalore.

From the available material, it is noticed that the applicant herein, has also filed a Writ Application before the Karnataka High Court in W.P. No.60141 / 2014 challenging the allotment and the same was dismissed on merits of the matter and hence the allotment of those lands referred to above in favour of the 3rd respondent, cannot be challenged before this Tribunal nor the Tribunal can consider it. It is pertinent to point out that the 3rd respondent has categorically admitted the existence of approximately 400 trees in the survey numbers referred to above. The case of the applicant is that the land situated in the aforesaid Survey numbers are Deemed Forest land as per the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated on 12.12.1996 in T.N. Godaverman case (W.P. (C) No.202 of 1995) and hence it attracts the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the respondent should not be allowed to cut and fell the trees whatever purpose for which it is meant for. At this juncture, a query was made by the Tribunal to the counsel for the 3rd respondent whether necessary application before the Forest Department was made for getting permission for cutting and felling those trees. In answer, the counsel for the 3rd respondent would submit that necessary application was made which is pending before the authorities concerned. It is disputed by the applicant that whether any application is already made and pending consideration in the hands of the authorities or yet to be made, it makes no difference since proper sanction by the Forest Authorities who are duty bound to consider the classification of the land in question and find out whether it attracts Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and whether and cutting and felling of trees is necessitated by circumstances, the 3rd respondent cannot cut and fell the trees.

The Tribunal feels it fit that there cannot be any impediment in restraining the 3 rd respondent from cutting and felling the trees till proper permission is obtained and till that time they are to be restrained from cutting and felling the trees. At the time of consideration of the application whether made or yet to be made by the 3rd respondent, the authorities are directed to consider the classification of the land whether it is Deemed Forest land or not as put forth by the counsel for the applicant along with all other necessary relevant provisions and pass suitable orders thereon as required by law. The application is allowed to that extent restraining the 3rd respondent from cutting and felling the trees till the time necessary orders are passed in their favour on cutting and felling trees in accordance with law.

With the above directions the application stands disposed of. No cost.