F THE REGIONAL OFFICE, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, NAGPUR v. MS INDURAO SANDAL PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AND OTHERS
Case Details
14264.23ca etc (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 934 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.14264 OF 2023 IN WP/14252/2023 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FORESTS (CENTRAL) AND HEAD OF THE REGIONAL OFFICE, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, NAGPUR VERSUS M/S SIDDHESHWAR PRAKRIYA UDYOG THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MANGESH MADHUKAR POTGHAN AND OTHERS AND 935 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.14267 OF 2023 IN WP/14214/2023 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FORESTS (CENTRAL) AND HEAD OF THE REGIONAL OFFICE, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, NAGPUR VERSUS MS INDURAO SANDAL PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR AND OTHERS …. Mr Ajay G. Talhar, DSGI for Applicant Mr Rajendra Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/b Mr Amol R. Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr S. K. Tambe, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE : 1st December, 2023 PER COURT: 1. We have heard the learned D.S.G.I. on behalf of the Applicant and the learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the Original Petitioners, in both the Petitions. 14264.23ca etc (2) 2. We need to clarify that, paragraph 2 of our order dated
Decision
08/11/2023, passed in both the Writ Petitions, does not in any way convey, as if the learned D.S.G.I. has granted a concession to the Petitioners to utilize Sandal wood procured from the Sandal wood trees grown within the limits of the agricultural fields of the Petitioners. That is the actual position of law. The statement made based on a legal position, cannot be interpreted to mean any concession being granted by a legal representative. 3. The learned D.S.G.I. has placed on record a copy of the communication dated 13/11/2023, received by him from Shri C. B. Tashildar, Assistant Inspector General of Forests (Central) Regional Office, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Nagpur. In paragraph Nos.6, 7 and 8 of the said communication, the said Authority has stated as under :- “6. It is requested to plead before the Hon'ble High Court that the SLC (Respondent No. 2) may be directed to carry out a correct assessment of available timber for the State of Maharashtra within a prescribed time limit before granting licenses to new wood based industries, which is an easy solution to the problems faced by applicants of new wood- based industries. 7. It is requested to plead before the Hon'ble High Court that the SLC has been constituted to consider and issue 14264.23ca etc (3) licenses to wood-based industries. Granting permissions for felling of sandalwood trees is not within the mandate of the SLC. The aspect of felling is to be looked after by the State Forest Department. The applicants can approach the SLC only for seeking licenses for the establishment of wood- based industries. 8. The act of granting license to a new wood-based industry without assessment of available timber will be viewed as contempt of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Orders as mentioned above, as General Direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Order dated 04/03/1997 is still in force. Therefore, any submission made in contempt of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Orders is requested to be withdrawn.” 4. Our attention is drawn to the provisions of the Maharashtra Felling of Trees (Regulation) Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Maharashtra Act of 1964’), more particularly, the Schedule below Section 2(f), which indicates the entry of Sandal tree at Sr. No.8. 5. The learned Senior Advocate points out the Government Resolution dated 23/10/2019, by which, a Committee was constituted for suggesting improvements on subjects related to forests. The 5 members of the Committee are set out in the said Government Resolution. He then points out 14264.23ca etc (4) Clause 7 of the said Government Resolution, which reads as under :- “7. सममितीच्या का्यरककाामिमधील मवमवमध बाबीच्या चचरसाठीी राज््यसतरावर का्यरशाळेचे आ्योजन करण्यासाठीी मविी्य तरतूद करणे आवश्यक आहे. त््याकररता आवश्यक मविी्य तरतूद प्मधान मिरख््य o नसारकक (अररसाकल्, मन्योजन व मवकास), मिहाराष् राज््य, नाग्ूर ्याानी करावी. 6. The learned Senior Advocate then refers to a communication by the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Protection), State of Maharashtra State, Nagpur, more specifically, Clauses 3, 4, 5 and 6, which read as under :- “3.00 चादनाचे म्क हे उच मिरल्य देणारे असल्याने शेतक -्याानी त््यााची लागवडा के लेली आहे, o लागवडाीकडाे वळत आहेत. ्याckcr आ<kok घेतला असता राज््यामिम्ये सरमिारे 839 हेक्र केतात चादन वृक लागवडा करण्यात आलेली आहे. भारत सरकारचे Ik;kZoj.k o ou ea=ky;kP;k fnukad 18/11/2014 च्या मिागरदशरक सरचना अ्व्ये खााजगी केतावरील वृकतोडा न वाहतरक ्रवा््याr शशFkh लता आणणे कररता मिागरदशरक सरचना मदलेल्या आहेत. त््याचप्मिाणे राष्ी्य कृ षयी वामनकम मधोर.k 2014 अ्व्ये ज््या वृक प्जाती वनकेतात आढळून ्येत नाही अशा वृक प्जाातीची वृक लागवडा , त््याaph तोडा व वाहतरक सरलभ करणे सादभारत मिागरदशरक सरचना मदलेल्या आहेत. मिहाराष् राज््यात मिहात्मिा गाामधी राष्ी्य 14264.23ca etc (5) ग्रामिीण रोजगार हमिी ्योजनेतागरत खााजगी जमिीनीवर वृक लागवडाीची ्योजना राबमवण्यात ्येत आहे. ्यामिम्ये चादनवृक लागवडाीचा सरमदा समिावेश आहे. 4.00 चादन वृकाची तोडा, वाहतरक, व मवलहेवा् ्याचे सम्याचे मन्यमिााचे साबामधाने का्य समिस्या आहेत हे मिामहती करुन घेणेकररता मदनााक 19/8/2020 रोजी शेतकरी, उद्योजक व केती्य अधधिमधकारी ्यााचे os मबनार आ्योजजत करण्यात आलेले होते, त््यामिम्ये शेतक-्याानी प्ामिरख््याने वृकलागवडाीस प्ोत्साहन ममिळण्यासाठीी मन्यमिात शशरीलता आणण्याकररता सर्मवले. 5.00 शासन मनणर्य मदनााक 23/10/2019 अ्व्ये वनमवषय्यक का्यद्यामिम्ये सरमधारणा सरचमवण्यासाठीी प्मधान मिरख््य वनसारकक (वन बल प्मिरखा) ्यााचे अम्यकतेखााली समिीती गठीीत करण्यात आली आहे. मदनााक 27/8/2020 रोजी सदर समिीतीची बैठीक आ्योजजत करण्यात आली. ्या बैठीकममिम्ये वरील मिरद्या (1) मिम्ये नमिूद के लेल्या का्यदेशीर तरतरदी साबामधी समवसतर चचार करण्यात आली . त््यामिम्ये समिीतीने मिहाराष् झााडाे तोडाण्याबाबत (मवमन्यमिन) अधधिमधमन्यमि, १९६४ च्या सूची मिमधून अ.क. ८ वरील चादन वगळण्याकररता सरचमवले. 6.00 चादन ्या प्जातीचा सावमधरन करण्यासाठीी खााजगी केतावर व््या्कररत््या लागवडा करण्यास प्ोत्साहन देणे आवश्यक आहेत. हा उदेश साम्य करण्याकरीता मिहाराष् झााडाे तोडाण्याबाबत (मवमन्यमिन) 1964 च्या अधधिमधमन्यमिासोबत जोडालेल्या अनरसरधधिच मिमधील चादन वृक वगळण्याकरीता अधधिमधसरचनेचे मिराठीी व इाग्रजी प्ारु् शासन मिा््यतेसाठीी सादर करण्यात ्येत आहे.” 14264.23ca etc (6) 7. He then draws our attention to the Notification dated 23/03/2021, by which, the entry “Santalum (panu)” has been deleted as Entry No.8 in the Schedule under the Maharashtra Act of 1964, which crystallizes the position that, no application for seeking permission for chopping down/felling a Sandal wood tree could be filed or entertained under the Maharashtra Act of 1964. 8. The learned Senior Advocate then points out the decision, placed on record at Page Nos.398, 399 and 400 of the Petition paper-book. The important conditions as approved by majority by the 9 members Committee, are as under :- “Decision of SLC- As the projects are on restrictive lands, negligible or nil presence of Sandalwood trees in the nearby forest areas, considering the efforts undertaken by the applicants, employment generation potential and need to promote Social Forestry species, the SLC by majority decision approved the two proposals of Sandalwood cutting and processing with following terms and conditions- The permission is granted only for a- silviculturally mature Sandalwood trees available on farm lands of applicants. No outside Sandalwood timber is permitted. The applicant shall give an undertaking regarding this to CF (T) Nashik who shall ensure that condition is not violated in any 14264.23ca etc (7) manner whatsoever. The CF(T) Nashik shall maintain record of felling as well as processing operations and submit periodic compliance to SL.C. b- The applicants shall ensure that additional permits/ licenses from other Government Department are complied with before starting of operations. c- The applicants will be liable to be prosecuted as per law in case of any deviation or violation of terms and conditions. d- The CF(T) Nashik may enforce any other condition or mechanism he deems fit in interest of forest conservation while giving license. He shall ensure that license is granted in accordance with provisions of Maharashtra Forest Rules 2014” 9. He then points out that one of the members of the Committee, Shri. Tashildar, (who has addressed the learned D.S.G.I. vide communication dated 13/11/2023), had refused to sign the minutes of the discussion and the decision to grant licence to the present Petitioners. Out of the 9 members of the Committee, one was absent. Shri. Tashildar has refused to sign and 7 members have approved the minutes and terms of the licence granted to the Petitioners. 10. Needless to state, we have perused the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in T. N. Godavarman 14264.23ca etc (8) Thirumulpad Vs. Union of India in Writ Petition (Civ.) No.202/1995 vide the order dated 04/03/1997, directing the closure of all unlicensed Saw Mills, Veneer and Ply Wood Industries and also prohibited granting licences. There is no dispute that the Petitioners are not un-licensed factories. The Petitioners, pursuant to the said directions, have been granted licence with strict conditions after the Maharashtra Act, 1964 was amended, deleting Entry No.8 (Sandal wood). The ad interim order passed by us does not in any way grant any liberty to the Petitioners to ignore the terms and conditions of the licence. 11. In view of the above, the ad interim conditional relief granted to the Petitioners is in tune with the terms and conditions of the licence, by which, the Petitioners were directed to file an affidavit undertaking in this Court, as well as to be delivered to the Authorities stating that, ‘the Petitioners would use the Sandal wood procured only from sandal trees grown within their farms’. Such relief does not preclude the Competent Authorities from inspecting the Unit and the activities of the Petitioners and carry out random survey/check/surveillance to ensure that the terms of the licence are not violated and the Petitioners do not resile from their statement. 14264.23ca etc (9) 12. With the above observations, both the Civil Applications are disposed off. 13. Needless to state, after filing of the affidavit in reply, if the Respondents desire modification of any order passed by this Court, they are liberty to do so. (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) sjk