1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.K.SREEDHAR RAO, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER
WRIT PETITION NO.14644/1998(KLR-REG-PIL) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.30774/1998(GM-FOR-PIL) & WRIT PETITION NO.9540/2001(KLR-RR-SUR/PIL)
W.P.NO.14644/1998 BETWEEN
1. SRI K G SRIDHAR S/O SRI K. GANGADHAR AGED 34 YEARS KALLAHALLA BHARATHIPURA POST THIRTHAHALLI-577 432 SHIMOGA
2. SRI T.K. SUDHEENDRA S/O SRI T.S. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED 40 YEARS, KALLAHALLA BHARATHIPURA POST THIRTHAHALLI-577 432
3. SRI B.R. SRINIVASA S/O SRI B. RAMAIAH IMBRAGODU, AGED 55 YEARS BHARATHIPURA POST THIRTHAHALLI-577 432
4. SRI K KRISHNASWAMY AGED 55 YEARS KALLAHALLA BHARATHIPURA POST THIRTHAHALLI-577 432 SHIMOGA DISTRICT 2
5. SRI N S ASHOK KUMAR S/O N S SHANKARANARAYANA AITHAL AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/A NAGARAVALLI MAKKIMANE POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK
6. SRI H V VIGNESWARA S/O LATE VENKATAKRISHNA BHAT AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS HERAMBHAPURA KATTEHAKKALU POST-577 415 THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
7. SRI H N SUBRAMANYA S/O LATE H S NARASIMHA BHAT AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS HERAMBHAPURA KATTEHAKKALU POST THIRTHAHALLI-577 415
8. SRI K S BALARAJ S/O SRINIVAS GOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/A KIRANKERE MAKKIMANE POST THIRTHAHALLI, SHIMOGA
9. SRI DEVARAJA S/O K S DHARMAYA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS KADEMAKKI MAKKIMANE POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
10. SRI K C NAGANANDA RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS KIRANKERE MAKKIMANE POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
3
11. G S VISHNUMURTHY BHATTA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS GADDEGALLU, KABASE MAKKIMANE POST (VIA) DEVANGI THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
12. SRI K.R.GOVINDASWAMY S/O RANGAPPA GOWDA AGED 50 YEARS KADEMAKKI MAKKIMANE POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
13. SRI K.N.MANJUNATHA S/O K.V.NAGA BHATTA AGED 49 YEARS KIRANAKERE VILLAGE MAKKIMANE POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
14. SRI K.V.SUBBANNA S/O LATE K.V.RAMAPPA AGED 66 YEARS HONNESARA POST SAGARA-577 417 KARNATAKA STATE
15. SRI DAYANANDA S/O BHIMANAIK AGED 30 YEARS
16. SMT. GIRIJABAI D/O HALANAIK AGED 50 YEARS
PETITIONERS 15 & 16 ARE R/A N.GANADHAKATTE G.K.HALLI POST CHANNAGIRI TALUK NOW PART OF DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 4
(PETITIONERS 15 & 16 ARE IMPLEADED V/O DATED 03.07.1998) ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI T N RAGHUPATHY, ADV., & SRI RAMESH, ADV.,)
AND
1. THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR MYSORE PAPER MILLS LTD NO.14/4, ALI ASKER ROAD P B NO.112, BANGALORE-560 052
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001
3. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST ECOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001
4. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS IN KARNATAKA ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003
5. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND PROJECT DIRECTOR WESTERN GHATS FORESTRY PROJECT VANAVIKAS, 18TH CROSS MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560003
6. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA
7. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA
8. KARNATAKA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REP BY ITS 5
MANAGING DIRECTOR VANAVIKAS, 18TH CROSS MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560003
9. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST, NEW DELHI (R-9 IMPLEADED V/O DATED 09.10.1998)
10. THE MYSORE PAPER MILLS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (REGD) A REGISTERED TRADE UNION PAPER TOWN, BHADRAVATHI BY ITS PRESIDENT (R-10 IMPLEADED V/O DATED 05.09.2000)
11. MPM SUGAR FACTORY LABOURERS ASSOCIATION (REGD), A REGISTERED TRADE UNION, PAPER TOWN BHADRAVATHI, BY ITS SECRETARY (R-11 IMPLEADED V/O DATED 05.09.2000) ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI N S SATHISH CHANDRA, ADV., FOR R-1; SRI R.G. KOLLE, AGA FOR R-2 TO 8; SRI V.K.NARAYANA SWAMY, CGC FOR R-9; SRI V.S.NAIK, ADV., FOR R-10 & 11)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE LEASING OF LAND BY THE R-2 IN FAVOUR OF THE R-1 AS PER THE LEASE DEED DATED 09.03.1993 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A IS ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, VOID AND OPPOSED TO THE PROVISIONS OF FOREST (CONSERVATION) ACT, 1980 AND ETC.,
W.P.NO.30774/1998 BETWEEN
1. SRI DHARMAPPA S/O BOMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O CHIKMAKOPPA 6
CHANDRAGUTTI HOBLI SORABA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT
2. ABU SAB S/O KHADAR SAB AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O –DO-
3. MOHAMMED HUSSAIN SAB S/O GUDU SAB AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O -DO-
4. GANAPATHIAPPA S/O FAKIRAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O -DO-
5. MD. HANIF SAB S/O GUDUSAB AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O -DO- ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI K B LOKANATH, ADV.,)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY COMMISSIONER FOR FOREST M S BUILDING BANGALORE-560 003
2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS IN KARNATAKA ARANYA BHAVANA, MALLESWARAM BANGALORE-560 003
3. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND PROJECT DIRECTOR FOR WESTERN GHATS, FORESTRY PROJECT VANA-VIKASA, 18TH CROSS MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE-560 003 7
4. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FORESTS, ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001
5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA
6. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA
7. THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER SORABA TALUK, SORABA SHIMOGA DISTRICT
8. THE MYSORE PAPER MILLS LTD REP BY ITS SECRETARY NO.14/4, ALI ASKAR ROAD P B NO.112, BANGALORE-52
9. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR THE MYSORE PAPER MILLS LTD., NO.14/4, ALI ASKAR ROAD P B NO. 112, BANGALORE-52 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.G.KOLLE, AGA FOR R-1 TO 7; SRI UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI N S SATISHCHANDRA, ADV., FOR R-8 & 9)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO FORBEAR FROM DOING ANYTHING INCLUDING CUTTING, UPROOTING, DESTROYING AND BURNING THE EXISTING NATURAL GROWTH, CULTIVATING AND PLANTING ANY PLANTATION ON THE LAND SY.NO.3 MEASURING 121 ACRES 7 GUNTAS OF CHIKMAKOPPA VILLAGE, CHANDRAGUTTI HOBLI, SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT AND ETC.,
8
W.P.NO.9540/2001 BETWEEN :
1. B N MANJUNATH S/O V NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O BELLAKKA, PO:NITTUR TALUK:HOSANAGAR DISTRICT:SHIMOGA
2. B K VENKATARAMANAIAH S/O KRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURE R/O BELLAKKA, PO:NITTUR TALUK:HOSANAGAR DISTRICT:SHIMOGA
3. KRISHNAMURTHY K D S/O DEVAPPAIAH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O DODDAMANE JADDU PO:NITTUR, TALUK:HOSANAGAR DISTRICT:SHIMOGA
4. APPANNA H S S/O SUBBA NAIK AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/O HARIMANE, PO:NITTUR TALUK:HOSANAGAR DISTRICT:SHIMOGA ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-1
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA 9
3. THE TAHSILDAR HOSANAGAR TALUK, HOSANAGAR DISTRICT:SHIMOGA
4. THE MYSORE PAPER MILLS ALI ASKER ROAD BANGALORE-560 052 BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.G. KOLLE, AGA FOR R-1 TO 3; SRI UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI N S SATISHCHANDRA, ADV., FOR R-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-F DATED 01.08.1964 BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AND ETC.,
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
K.Sreedhar Rao, Ag.CJ (Oral)
In Writ Petition No.14644/1998, the petitioners are aggrieved by the commissioning of Mysore Paper Mills
Limited in Bhadravathi and consequent orders of leasing lands to the factory located in and around Bhadravathi and also in Thirthahalli, Shimoga, Chickmagalur etc., for the purpose of cultivating trees to be used for manufacture of paper. The registered lease deed is executed by respondent
No.4 in favour of respondent No.1 on 03.09.1993 vide
Annexure-A. The lease is for a period of 40 years and the 10 lease is to expire by September 2020. The petitioners are the residents of Thirthahalli Taluk, They contend that forest land has been leased in favour of respondent No.1, which is illegal and affects the ecology and forest wealth. It is also contended that gomal lands have been leased, which is contrary to the provisions of the Karnataka Land
Revenue Act. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs:
“ PRAYER
WHEREFORE, petitioners most respectfully pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction:
(a) declare that the leasing of the land by the second respondent in favour of the first respondent as per the lease deed dated 3.9.1993 produced at Annexure-A is illegal, unconstitutional, void and opposed to the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980;
(b) declare that the encroachment of the gomal lands and soppina betta lands by the first respondent in the taluks of Thirthahalli, Hosanagar, Bhadravathi, Sagar and Shimoga is illegal, unauthorized and opposed to the 11
provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964;
(c) issue a direction to the second, fifth and seventh respondents to forthwith evict the first respondent from the area encroached by it;
(d) issue a direction to the second respondent to immediately take control of the entire portion leased to the first respondent as per the lease deed dated 3.9.1993 at Annexure-A and also the encroached area to villages under joint forest planning and management scheme by forming village forest committees and giving control of the areas in each village to the respective village forest committees and issue such direction to the committees for implementation of the National Forest Policy, 1988;
(e) issue a writ of prohibition restraining the first respondent from felling the trees planted by it in the areas covered by the lease deed dated 3.9.1993 produced at Annexure-A and also in the gomal lands and soppina betta lands encroached upon by it;
(f) allow this writ petition with costs and grant such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Court 12
deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity;
(g) declare that the supplemental lease deed dated 28.9.1996 executed between the first respondent and the State Government as per ANNEXURE R-22 is illegal and void;
(h) declare that the entire lease of forest lands, gomal lands, soppina betta lands, kaan lands in favour of the first respondent is illegal and void and further declare that it results in environmental degradation;
(i) direct the State Government to permit to use the uncultivated degraded lands other than forest lands, gomal lands, soppina betta lands and kaan lands, for raising plantation;
(j) declare that the order dated 10.8.2001 in No.F(C)A/11.6/139 MISC/KAR passed by the Central Government and produced at ANNEXURE R-75 is illegal and quash the same.”
2. Counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the
Management Plan pertaining to the lease has been approved by the Government of India for captive pulp wood plantation. The permission will last for four years and after every four years, a fresh renewal is to be taken subject to 13 the compliance of the directions issued. Respondent No.1 submits that the latest renewal is made in 2008 and the renewal is effective till 2014-2015. The lands in question come under the category of ‘C’ and ‘D’ class lands and they do not constitute reserved forest lands. Respondent No.1 has surrendered the reserved forest lands, the lands in wild life sanctuary so also the gomal lands.
3. Government Advocate supports the contention of Respondent No.1 and states that none of the lands leased come within the purview of reserved forest and wild life sanctuary. The gomal lands which were leased have been surrendered from time to time and there is no utilization of gomal lands by respondent No.1 as of now except where plantation as per the interim orders of this
Court is saved from immediate surrender. Surrender of such lands is directed to be made after the pulp wood is cut. Therefore, the cultivation of pulp wood on the gomal lands is in accordance with the terms of the Court order and the Management Plan approved by the Union of India.
4. It is further submitted that this Court appointed a Committee headed by one Sri N.V.Ramachandra Chetty,
IFS, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests consisting of 14 other officers of the Forest Department as members and that one of the members of the Committee is appointed on the suggestion of the petitioners. The Committee has submitted a report dated 28.02.2011. In the report, the
Committee has given about 14 recommendations to be complied by respondent No.1 with regard to management of the leased lands. It is submitted that the Management Plan also takes note of the suggestions and that all the suggestions given by the Committee have been fully complied. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed an affidavit to that effect before this Court. Keeping in view the above facts and the material, we do not find any merit in the writ petition because there is a categorical assertion substantiated by the Committee Report that no part of the reserved forest land has been leased. In respect of gomal lands, remaining one area where pulp wood trees are standing will be surrendered immediately after the trees become ripe for cutting. The petitioners have not produced any contrary material to controvert the report of the
Committee and also to show that the Management Plan is in conflict with the Forest Law. 15
5. In that view of the matter, this petition is dismissed so also Writ Petition No.30774/1998 and Writ
Petition No.9540/2001 are dismissed.
In view of the dismissal of the Writ Petitions, all pending applications do not survive for consideration and are accordingly dismissed.
(K.SREEDHAR RAO) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(S.ABDUL NAZEER) JUDGE
Ag.CJ & SANJ: 31.01.2013
ORDER ON BEING SPOKEN TO
K.Sreedhar Rao, Ag.CJ (Oral)
Sri T.N. Raghupathy, counsel for the petitioner with reference to the prayers in the petition made the following submissions in support of the contention in the petition.
(1) The lease granted is in violation of the Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) which stipulates that prior approval of the Central Government 16
was mandatory. But in the instant case expo-facto approval has been obtained.
(2) With reference to the report submitted by the
Committee, it is argued that the Committee did not go into the issue with regard to the illegal lease of the reserve forest land and gomal land. Therefore, it is just and necessary to find out
whether the forest land and gomal land which have been illegally leased have been surrendered. In that respect there is absolutely no independent material placed on record to satisfy the court that the lands illegally leased have been in fact surrendered to the Government.
(3) The terms of the lease insisted that in some portion of the lands leased, the fodder and firewood to be grown and there is violation of the terms of the lease.
(4) The terms of the lease provided that 12.5% of the trees cut should be provided as firewood to the local aids. The same has not been complied by Respondent No.1 since its inception.
(5) Respondent No.1 has illegally offered leased area as security for the loan borrowed from Commonwealth
Development Corporation, an International Agency.
(6) The Forest Development Policy of the State of
Karnataka envisages creation of Village Committee consisting of
Chairman of the Village Panchayath and Forest Officials for joint monitoring the ‘C’ and ‘D’ class lands and degraded forest area, 17 in particular to encourage growth of trees along side of the roads and to prevent destruction of open forest wealth.
(7) The unscientific growth of pulp wood trees in the larger extent of forest area would affect and damage fauna and flora of the natural forest.
2. In the context of the above submissions, it is submitted that there has been a total flagrant violation of provisions of the Act and has damaged the ecological sanctity of forest.
3. Sri R.G. Kolle, AGA in reply submitted that when the license to the Mysore Paper Mills Limited was granted when the Act had not come into force. In pursuance to the directions of this Court, the Mysore Paper Mills Limited obtained the needed permission. The Respondent No.1 being wholly owned by the State Government was well within the purview of requirements of law to seek and secure the needed approval from the Government of India.
4. It is submitted that the Senior Manager, Farm
Forestry/HQ had filed an affidavit on 10.01.2011 to the effect that no part of the reserved forest is ever leased and the ‘C’ and
‘D’ class and degraded forest lands were leased. The forest area pertaining to wild life area has been surrendered. In respect of 18 the gomal lands, it is stated that the said lands do not come
within the purview of the Act. The State Government has every right to de-reserve the gomal lands for any other purpose. In the present case, in view of the directions of this court, the gomal lands are being restored to its original position in a phased manner. Respondent No.1 after cutting the yield when it becomes ripened no further plantation is permitted and is being restored as gomal land.
5. In the affidavit, it is sworn to the effect that still there is pulp wood plantation in the gomal lands to an extent of
2439.03 hectares and that would be ripe for cutting by the outer limit of 2015 and after harvesting, the said entire extent of land
would be surrendered and restored as gomal land.
6. The fact of surrender of gomal lands is fully substantiated by the mahazars prepared to evidence the surrender of lands to which the officials of the Respondent No.1,
Revenue officials and forest officials are signatories. Respondent
No.1 has adhered to the requirement of the provisions of the Act and as per the Forest Conservation Policy periodical management plan is submitted and got approved from the
Central Government. There has been no violation of terms of lease and conditions stipulated in the Forest Management Plan.
19
7. With regard to the report of the Committee constituted by this Court, it is argued that although there was a dissenting opinion by the one of the Members of the Committee, however, after joint consultation by all the Members of the
Committee, certain recommendations have been made unanimously for the forest conservation and forest preservation.
The Committee has not found anything illegal on the part of
Respondent No.1 in pulp wood cultivation and any of the additional recommendations made to enhance the ecology of the forest. The Respondent No.1 and the Government would take all needed efforts and comply with the recommendations.
8. It is further submitted that Mysore Paper Mills
Limited is a State owned paper manufacturing industry
producing paper to an extent of 15% of the state’s needs and
that whatever paper produced is given at subsidized rate for
printing of text books and the Respondent No.1 undertakes to
print notebooks which are given at subsidized rates to various
sections of the students. There is no element of personal profit
on the part of Respondent No.1 in its activity. On the other
hand, the industrial activity of Respondent No.1 helps the
educational needs of the society, in particular the young
children, that apart provides substantial employment
particularly to thousands of people directly and indirectly.
20
9. The counsel for the Government of India adopted the arguments of the Government Advocate appearing for
Respondent No.2 and submits that the Government of India in strict compliance of the requirement of the Act has accorded the approval and there has been no violation of provisions of the Act in any manner.
10. On thorough consideration of the submissions made at the Bar by the counsel appearing for the parties, we find no good reason to hold that there has been an illegal lease of reserved forest land in favour of Respondent No.1. ‘C’ and ‘D’ class lands and degraded forest lands has been leased in favour of Respondent No.1 may be at the time when the lease was granted. The Act was not in force. The lease deed might have been executed after the Act came into force. However, the requirement of approval from the Government of India has been taken and irregularity if any is cured. The submission that no part of the reserved forest is leased is not countenanced by any contra material.
11. With regard to surrender of lands, the order of this
Court dated 08.12.2003 makes it explicit that the Conservator of
Forests, Mangalore Circle has taken possession of 1415.50 hectares and the Conservator of Forests, Shimoga has taken possession of 3249.80 hectares from Respondent No.1. The 21 short fall of 42 hectares is explained as a mistaken measurement. The order further observes that the pulp wood trees planted had reached 50% of their growth and cutting them at that stage would render national waste. Therefore, a direction
was issued to harvest the plantation after the trees are fully ripe for harvesting and thereafter the Revenue Department is directed to take over the same.
12. An Officer of Respondent No.1 has filed an affidavit and also produced records to show that under the mahazar prepared jointly by the officials of Respondent No.1, Forest
Department and Revenue Department, there has been surrender of gomal lands. The Respondent No.1 has also stated that it has taken note of all the recommendations of the Committee appointed by this court and implementing the said recommendations. The Respondent No.1 has submitted the management plan got approved from the Government of India.
The latest management plan approved is in the year 2008 by the
Government of India and the said management plan valid till
2014-2015. The Government of India, obviously, while approving the management plan would in law necessarily take care to see that no violation of the Act is committed. When once the management plan is approved, it is to be presumed that the approval has been accorded in accordance with law and there is no contra material to rebut the said presumption. Therefore, on 22 overall consideration of the facts and material, we find no good ground to interfere with the order dictated on 24.01.2013.
Sd/- ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- JUDGE
bkv/psg*