Orders dated 1st September 2006
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. NOS.1624-1625 IN WRIT PETITION (C) NO.202 OF 1995
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS
(For implementation and exemption from filing O.T.)
With I.A. Nos.1628-1630 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For Directions, exemption from filing O.T. and impleadment)
I.A. Nos.532-534 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For impleadment and directions and recommendations of C.E.C.)
I.A. No.1000 with 982-984, 1026-1028, 1123-1124, 1210-1211, 1197-1199,
1250-1251 and 1512 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(Recommendation of C.E.C. regarding mining in Jamua Ramgarh Wild
Life Sanctuary, for directions, impleadment and exemption from filing
O.T.)
I.A. Nos.1601-1603 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For impleadment, directions and exemption from filing O.T.)
I.A. No.1383 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(State of Forest Report, 2003)
I.A. Nos.1397-1398 in I.A. No.1289 in I.A. Nos.1238-1239 in
Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For intervention/Directions
11/03/2005)
I.A. No.1399 and I.A. No.1569 with I.A. No.946 in I.A. Nos.301-382
in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(Report of C.E.C. in I.A. No.946 in I.A. Nos.301-382)
I.A. Nos.1415-1416 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For Directions and exemption from filing O.T.)
I.A. Nos.1417-1419 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For impleadment, Direction and exemption from filing O.T.)
I.A. Nos.1327-1328 and 1526 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(For impleadment, directions and exemption from filing O.T.)
I.A. No.1494 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(Arising out of C.P. (C) No.428 of 2004)
I.A. No.1495 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(Arising out of C.P. (C) No.479 of 2002)
Cont. Pet. (C) No.442/2004 with I.A. No.1400 in W.P.(C) No.202 of 1995
(Recommendation of C.E.C. in C.P. (C) No.442 of 2004)
I.A. No.1408 and 1457 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(Report of C.E.C. in Appln. No.305 filed before C.E.C. and appln.
for extension of time for filing reply affidavit)
I.A. No.1462 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995
(Impleadment and Directions)
Writ Petition (C) No.603 of 2000
(With appln.(s) for stay and office report)
Date: 01/09/2006 These Matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARIJIT PASAYAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.H. KAPADIA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.K. Manohar,Adv.
For Applicant(s)
In I.A. 1624-1625: Mr. T.N. Rao,Adv.
In I.A. 1628-30: Mr. Ranjit Kumar,Sr.Adv.
I.A. 982-984: Mr. Atul Y. Chitale,Adv.
I.A. 1026-1028: Mr. Mukul Rohatgi,Sr.Adv.
I.A. 1123-1124: Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Prateek Jalan,Adv.
I.A. 1197-1199: Mr. Manish Singhvi,Adv.
Mr. P.V. Yogeshwaran,Adv.
I.A. 1210-1211: Mr. Ejaz Maqbool,Adv.
I.A. 1512: Mr. V.A. Mohta,Sr.Adv.
Mr. D.K. Garg,Adv.
Mr. B.S. Billowria,Adv.
Mr. Manzoor Ali Khan,Adv.
I.A. 1601-1603 &
1327-1328: Mr. Prashant Kumar,Adv.
I.A. 1397-1398: Ms. Susmita Lal,Adv.
Ms. Rinchen Bhutia,Adv.
I.A. 1415-1416: Mr. Mukesh K. Giri,Adv.
I.A. 1417-1419: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha,Adv.
Mr. M.P. Jha,Adv.
Mr. Ram Ekbal Roy,adv.
Mr. Harshvardhan Jha,Adv.
I.A. 1494: Mr. Satya Mitra Garg,Adv.
I.A. 1495 & Cont.
Pet: Ms. Santosh Singh,Adv.
I.A. 1462: Mr. Jagdish Chandra Nair,Adv.
Mr. Roy Abraham,Adv.
Mr. Himinder Lal,Adv.
W.P. 603/2000: Mr. K.K. Rai,Adv.
I.A. 532-534: Mr. Rajiv Mehta,Adv.
Mr. Biswanath Agrawalla,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. A.D.N. Rao,Adv.
Mr. V.N. Raghupathy,Adv.
For Rajasthan: Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta,AAG.
Mr. Naveen Kumar Singh,Adv.
Mr. Mukul Sood,Adv.
Mr. Sashwat Gupta,Adv.
Ms. Shikha Tandon,Adv.
For Assam: Mr. Riku Sharma,Adv.
for M/s. Corporate Law Group,Advs.
Mr. M.P. Shorawala,Adv.
For Mizoram: Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhanan,Adv.
Mr. R. Sathish,Adv.
For Kerala: Mr. T.L.V. Iyer,Sr.Adv.
Mr. P.V. Dinesh,Adv.
Ms. Sindhu T.P.,Adv.
For Ranchi Association:
For Punjab:
For Uttar Pradesh: Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi,Sr.Adv.
For Tripura:
Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
For Tata Steel Ltd.: Ms. Nandini Gore,Adv.
For Madhya Pradesh:
For Arunachal Pradesh: Mr. Anil Shrivastav,Adv.
For Goa:
For Haryana:
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
I.A.Nos.1624-1625 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The interlocutory applications shall be taken up along with I.A.
No.1287.
In the meanwhile, the applicant may file an application making
substantive prayers.
I.A.Nos.1628-1630 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
What the applicant, in fact, seeks is the implementation of the
communication of the Deputy Conservator of Forests dated 23rd May, 2006.
It would
...5/-
be appropriate if the applications are prosecuted by the learned amicus
curiae. The State of Rajasthan shall file reply within four weeks. In the
meantime, the Central Empowered Committee may also look into the
matter and file its response. The applicant henceforth, if comes in
possession of any document, may supply the same to the learned amicus
curiae.
I.A. Nos.532-534 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The response to the recommendations of the Central
Empowered Committee may be filed within four weeks.
I.A. No.1000 with 982-984, 1026-1028, 1123-1124, 1210-1211, 1197-
1199,1250-1251 and 1512 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The State of Rajasthan is permitted to file additional affidavit
within eight weeks.
List after eight weeks.
I.A.Nos.1601-1603 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The matters are stated to be listed before the Central
Empowered Committee on 11th September, 2006. The Madhya Pradesh
Development Corporation and the State Government may appear before
the Central Empowered Committee and file requisite documents as well.
List the interlocutory applications after receipt of the report
from the Central Empowered Committee.
I.A. No.1383 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
List the interlocutory application after four weeks.
I.A. Nos.1397-1398 in I.A. No.1289 in I.A. Nos.1238-1239 in Writ Petition
(C) No.202 of 1995:
I.A. No.1397:
The Oil India Limited is permitted to conduct the survey, subject
to the conditions mentioned in the Report dated 25th August, 2006, which are
acceptable to the applicant.
The interlocutory application is disposed of.
I.A. No.1398:
Response to the recommendations of the Central Empowered
Committee may be filed within two weeks.
The interlocutory application is adjourned for two weeks.
I.A. No.1399 and I.A. No.1569 with I.A. No.946 in I.A. Nos.301-382 in Writ
Petition (C) No.202 of 1995 and I.A. Nos.1327-1328 and 1526 in Writ
Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The Central Empowered Committee, in its report dated 1st
September, 2005, after noticing in the Report how 1607 saw mills have
been re-opened in the garb of renewal of the old licenses, has made the
following recommendations:
"(a) suspending the functioning of all the 1607 saw
mills to where licenses have been renewed after
04.3.97."
The further recommendation of the Central Empowered
Committee is that the Report in respect of each of 1607 saw mills shall be
filed by the State Government giving details of old licenses and other
particulars in the recommendation, i.e., paragraph 13(b) of the Report
which reads as under:
"directing the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh to file a
report of each of the 1607 saw mills giving details of the
old licenses, the year in which the such licenses were
issued, the year upto which the old licenses were
renewed, the date on which the saw mill
was closed, the number of years for which the saw mills
had run illegally, the officer who had verified and
cross-verified the genuineness of the old license, the
basis of reopening of the saw mill, the details of the
machinery and electric connection at the time of the
renewal of the old license and whether the delay in the
renewal was due to administrative reasons or due to
lapse on the part of the saw mill owner."
The learned counsel appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh
submits that, having regard to the facts of the case, the aforesaid
recommendations may be accepted. In this view, we direct the
suspension of all 1607 saw mills in respect of which licenses were
renewed after 4th March, 1997. The State Government would ensure that
the said saw mills do not operate. The Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, is
directed to file a report in terms of paragraph 13(b), which
recommendation we have accepted, within a period of eight weeks. We
also accept the third recommendation contained in paragraph 13(c) to
the effect that after receipt of the report, the saw mills in respect of which
regular renewals have been given, the renewal fees were deposited
regularly and the renewal of licenses were delayed due to
administrative/technical reasons and not due to default on the part of the
applicant saw mills may be permitted to be reopened. The Central
Empowered Committee has also made the following recommendations:
"(a) a seniority list of plywood/veneer units operating
in the State of Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal (part of
undivided U.P.) on the strength of `No Objection
Certificate' issued by the Forest Department prior to
04.3.97 may be prepared after verifying the validity
and genuineness of such `No Objection Certificate';
(b) after accessing timber availability qua capacity of
existing licensed saw mills depending upon the
availability of timber the existing plywood/veneer units
may be granted license on the principle of first come
last go. The units found not eligible for grant of license
may be closed;
(d) the electricity connection of all unlicensed units
shall be disconnected, their machinery's shall be
dismantled and the various registration etc. issued to
such units shall be cancelled by the respective
authorities."
The State Government has no objection to the acceptance of
the aforesaid recommendations. We order accordingly.
Another recommendation made by the Central Empowered
Committee is:
"(c) as far as feasible, the plywood/ veneer units should
be permitted to operate only in the industrial estates
identified for this purpose. This is particularly
necessary in Uttaranchal where practically all areas are
within an aerial distance of 10 km. from the nearest
forest."
As prayed, we permit the State Government to file an affidavit
placing on record the difficulty, if any, in accepting the aforesaid
recommendation.
The recommendation for fixing the responsibility against the
officials responsible for allowing large number of wood based industries
to re-open/continue in violation of this Court's orders would be
considered at an appropriate stage.
I.A.Nos.1415-1416 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995 and I.A.Nos.1417-
1419 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The State Government is granted four weeks' time to file
reply. The Central Empowered Committee may also look into it and file
its response, if necessary.
I.A. No.1494 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995, I.A. No.1495 in Writ
Petition (C) No.202 of 1995 and Cont. Pet. (C) No.442/2004 with I.A.
No.1400 in W.P.(C) No.202 of 1995:
We do not propose to proceed with the contempt petition and
the interlocutory applications in view of what is stated in the report of
the Central Empowered Committee dated 31st August, 2006. The
interlocutory applications and the contempt petition are dismissed.
I.A. No.1408 and 1457 in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995 and I.A. No.1462
in Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995:
The State of Kerala is granted two weeks' time to file its
response to the report of the Central Empowered Committee.
Writ Petition (C) No.603 of 2000:
The writ petition is adjourned.
I.A. No.827 and connected matters: In re.: CAMPA
List the matters on 15th September, 2006.
[ T.I. Rajput ] [ V.P. Tyagi ]
A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar
