CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(1994) 09 AHC CK 0098

Rikhi Dev vs District Forest Officer and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 15 September 1994 · Citation: (1994) 3 AWC 1748

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Keshote, J · Ravi S. Dhavan, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29502 of 1994

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 359 words
1.

It is reported by the Bench Secretary that the lawyers are on strike and thus they have abstained from attending the Court. The Court has perused the record of the writ petition and the submissions made therein and is passing orders on merits.

2.

The prayer of the Petitioner is that he be permitted to cut 45 trees, 42 of Shisham and 3 of Shamer on his plot No. 499/19. The Petitioner claims that he is the tenure-holder of this plot and as the trees are too old, he is entitled to cut them and for each tree that he will cut, he will plant another one.

3.

The contention of the Petitioner is shit the District Forest Officer, Pilibhit or the District Magistrate Pilibnit are not passing any order on his application dated 16th May, 1990 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition) for permitting him to cut these 45 trees.

4.

Notwithstanding, that the Respondents aforesaid may be committing an irregularity is not acting on Petitioner�s application, it is not every irregularity in which High Court must necessarily issue a writ and that also a prerogative writ. Even on the submission of the Petitioner, what the Petitioner is intending to do is not cutting trees, but virtually a forest.

5.

In the writ petition it is painted out that the Petitioner has a right to cut his trees under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. This may be so. Bat the Constitution of India particularly Article 48-A and further Article 51-A Sub-clause (g) casts an obligation on the State and every citizen not to disbalance the ecology and environment and respect the green cover and the forest wealth of nation. If every one starts doing what the Petitioner intends to do, then the green cover and the forest will be subject to an accelerated rate of vanishing and will leave a disbalanced ecology and the balance of Nature may not even be restored in a century.

6.

Thus, in whatever manner the Respondents may meet the request of the Petitioner, this Court will certainly not issue any writ on this petition.

7.

The writ petition is, thus, dismissed.