AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Applicant who is the proprietor of M/s Annapurna filling station situated at GT road Kurawli Mainpuri has alleged that Respondent No. 7 who has been given letter of intent dated 11.01.2012 by Respondent No. 6 Hindustan Petroleum Company for petroleum retail outset at Etah-Bhogaon Road between Km Stone 237 and 240 on NH-91 Gata No. 405, Village Gangapur, Mohammadpur, Kurawali, District Mainpuri has felled green trees of protected forests to make access to the pump in violation of Forest (Conservation) Act and guidelines for access roads for petroleum retail on National Highways. He has prayed that used of forest land by Respondent 6 and 7 in front of Gata No. 405 Village Gangapur, Mohammadpur, District Mainpuri be restrained. He has also prayed that the Respondent 1 to 5 be directed to fence the area of protected forest in front of No. 405 in between Kms 237-238 Village Gangapur, Mohammadpur, GT Road Kurawali, District Mainpuri. There were other incidental prayers made in the application.
Annexure A-4 at page 69 Annexed with the application is the letter dated 03.09.2012 from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, NH- II Section addressed to the Regional Officer, NHAI, Lucknow regarding permission for access to the proposed retail outlet of M/s HPCL at Km 237.00 (RHS) on NH-91 (New NH No. 34) at Village Gangapur, Mohammadpur Tehsil, District Mainpuri wherein it has been stated that the proposal has been approved in principle by Competent Authority in the Ministry and the provisional NOC is being issued to the proposal.
In the Status Report filed on 03.01.2017 after inspection on 10.10.2016 by the Divisional Director, Social Forestry Division, Mainpuri Respondent No. 4 placed at page 164, it has been stated that on 11.09.2013 in the aforesaid protected forest land there were 13 trees standing out of which 5 trees were felled after receiving prior approval of Central Government for widening of NH 91 conveyed vide F.No. 8-16/2012/FC dated 09.05.2013 and State Government Letter No. 1429/ 14.02.2013 dated 16.08.2013. Further one Shisham tree was uprooted by storms on 18.06.2015 and remaining 7 trees were still standing on the site. It has also been stated therein that after the order dated 15.06.2016 of this Tribunal no trees in front of the petrol pump in question in the protected forest has been felled and in compliance of the order of the State Government 291 trees have planted in the site of the Respondent No. 7.
The Learned Counsel of the Applicant submits that there is no FC for clearing of trees in the land in question. He submits that the location where 5 trees have been felled is different from the land for which FC has been received.
It is difficult to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant as the Status Report submitted by the Divisional Director, Social Forest Division after inspection of the site on 10.10.2016 clearly states that felling of trees has been done after receiving due approvals as laid down under Law. We are of the view that this litigation has arisen out of the business rivalry between applicant and Respondent No. 7 and that there has been no violation of provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980. In view of above we do not find any substance in this Original Application and it deserves to be rejected.
In the result, this Original Application is dismissed as being devoid of merits.
The Miscellaneous Application No. 1234 of 2016 and 556 of 2018 does not require consideration as the Original Application No. 658 of 2016 has been dismissed.