AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Judges
Acts
  • FC Act
  • Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Judges
Acts
  • FC Act
  • Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The document is a composite order of the Supreme Court of India disposing of, or giving further directions on, a large number of Interlocutory Applications (IAs) arising in long-pending forest-related litigation. The matters touch on: (i) pending approvals under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for coal mining projects, (ii) allegations of irregular bamboo extraction in Assam, (iii) a request by the State of Arunachal Pradesh to dereserve part of Deopani Reserve Forest, and (iv) several scheduling and compliance directions for reports from the National Board for Wildlife and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC). The order largely fixes timelines, issues limited interim relief, and, in two instances, finally disposes of specific IAs.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether notices issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Sambalpur North Forest Division (dated 14-6-2010 and 24-6-2010) should be stayed and an existing mining licence extended while a Section 2 FC Act application remains pending.
  2. Whether allegations that undue favour was shown to M/s Hill Trade Agencies in bamboo harvesting in the North Cachar Hills warranted an inquiry by the Court.
  3. Whether the Court should permit the State of Arunachal Pradesh to dereserve 134.20 sq km of Deopani Reserve Forest in exchange for notifying 163 sq km of dense forest as Senzen Reserve Forest.
  4. Whether certain other IAs (Items 2741-42) retained any live prayer in view of lapse of time.

Arguments of the Parties

Applicant-Coal India Subsidiaries (Items 307-12)

  • An application under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has been pending since 2008 after resubmission.
  • All mines in question are operated by subsidiaries of Coal India Ltd.
  • The entire Net Present Value (NPV) payable for diversion of forest land has already been deposited.

Applicant Alleging Irregular Bamboo Harvesting (Items 313)

  • Contended that the North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council had shown undue favour to M/s Hill Trade Agencies and its sister concerns in harvesting bamboo from forest areas under its control.
  • Sought an inquiry into alleged violations of court orders, the Forest (Conservation) Act and other relevant laws.

Respondents / Reports Relied Upon

  • The Central Empowered Committee reported that no material was produced to establish any violation by the Council and suggested that the application appeared to further the business interest of a third party.
  • For the dereservation request, the CEC recommended approval subject to obtaining formal clearance under the FC Act.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Order dated 28-3-2008, (2008) 7 SCC 126 Exemption from payment of NPV in certain regularisation cases. Cited by the CEC to justify recommending dereservation without further NPV liability (Item 314).
Order dated 9-5-2008, (2008) 7 SCC 133 Same principle on NPV exemption. Relied on in the CEC’s recommendation for the Deopani dereservation proposal.
Interim order dated 15-7-2011, (2011) 14 SCC 297 Existing interim protection in related Special Leave Petitions. Extended for a further period of four weeks (Items 318-20).

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Stay and Licence Extension (Items 307-12): In light of the prolonged pendency of the FC Act application and full payment of NPV, the Court granted a one-month extension of the existing mining licence and stayed the impugned notices for four weeks, issuing notice to the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests and the State of Orissa.

Bamboo Harvesting Allegations (Items 313): After examining the CEC report, which found no evidence of violation and suggested the application was filed to advance third-party business interests, the Court held that the IAs lacked merit and dismissed them. It nevertheless directed the State Government to consider CEC observations in paragraph 12 of its report and act according to law.

Dereservation Request (Item 314): The Court accepted the detailed CEC report noting: (a) encroachments were sixty years old, (b) they qualified for regularisation under MoEF guidelines of 18-9-1990, (c) a larger compensatory area had been declared as Senzen Reserve Forest, and (d) MoEF had granted in-principle approval. On these grounds, the application was allowed, permitting dereservation subject to formal FC Act approval.

Time-Barred Relief (Items 2741-42): Observing that the relief sought had become infructuous due to passage of time, the Court dismissed these applications.

Procedural and Scheduling Directions: The remainder of the order fixes dates for filing reports (e.g., by the National Board for Wildlife and the CEC), sets hearing dates, records counsel appearances, and carries forward interim orders without entering substantive findings.

Holding and Implications

FINAL ORDERS:

  • Licence extension granted and DFO notices stayed for four weeks (Coal India subsidiaries).
  • Applications alleging irregular bamboo harvesting dismissed as meritless, with an advisory direction to the State Government.
  • Permission granted to dereserve 134.20 sq km of Deopani Reserve Forest subject to statutory approval.
  • Several IAs dismissed as infructuous; others were merely adjourned with directions for filing of reports and written submissions.

Implications: The order affords temporary operational continuity to coal-mining projects, finalises a land-exchange scheme facilitating regularisation of historic encroachments in Arunachal Pradesh, and clarifies that unsubstantiated public-interest allegations will not be entertained. No new jurisprudential precedent is set; the rulings are confined to the specific interlocutory matters before the Court.

    Centre For Environmental Law, World Wide Fund-India v. Union Of India And Others

    Order

    Item 301: IAs Nos. 128-29 and 144

    1. As prayed for, four weeks' time is granted to file report of the National Board for Wildlife. List immediately thereafter.

    Item 302: IAs Nos. 3051-53

    2. List these IAs after four weeks.

    Item 303: IA No. 925 with CP (C) No. 193 of 2001, IA No. 1127 in 925 and IA No. 4 in CP (C) No. 193 of 2001

    3. Post these IAs after two weeks. The learned counsel appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu would take instructions in the meantime.

    Item 304: IAs Nos. 3094-95

    4. Post these IAs after three weeks.

    Item 305: IAs Nos. 3047-48

    5. Post these IAs after four weeks.

    Item 306: IA No. 2066 arising out of CP (C) No. 133 of 2007

    6. The Central Empowered Committee is directed to file its report within four weeks. Post this IA after four weeks.

    Items 307-12: IAs Nos. 2902-11 and 2935-36

    7. Issue notice.

    8. Mr Haris Beeran, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and Mr Shibhashish Misra, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the State of Orissa.

    9. Mr H.P Raval, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the applicants submits that the application under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is pending consideration since 2008 onwards after its resubmission. He further submits that subsidiaries of Coal India Ltd. are operating all the mines in question and the entire NPV payment has already been deposited.

    10. In the facts and circumstances, the licence already granted to the applicants stands extended by one month. The notices dated 14-6-2010 and 24-6-2010 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Sambalpur North Forest Division, Sambalpur shall stand stayed for a period of four weeks.

    11. Post these IAs after two weeks.

    Item 313: IAs Nos. 1267-68 and 1395

    12. These applications have been preferred by the applicant contending that undue favour has been shown to M/s Hill Trade Agencies and its sister concerns by the North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council in respect of harvesting of bamboo from forest areas under its administrative control. The applicant made a prayer in these applications to initiate inquiry into various allegations made in the IAs.

    13. Under directions given by this Court, the Central Empowered Committee has submitted its report. It is stated in the report of the Central Empowered Committee that the applicant has not been able to provide any material document to establish that the Council has violated this Court's orders, the Forest (Conservation) Act, relevant State Government's Act or any other rules or regulations governing felling and transportation of bamboo. It is further stated in the report that this application was filed to further the business interest of a third party.

    14. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and the view expressed by the Central Empowered Committee, we find no reason to further prosecute this matter. These applications lack merits and, therefore, stand dismissed. However, we would like to give a direction to the State Government to take note of the observations made by the Central Empowered Committee in Para 12 of its report and to take suitable action according to law.

    15. The applications are, accordingly, dismissed.

    Item 314: IA No. 1421 in 703

    16. This application has been filed by the State of Arunachal Pradesh seeking permission of this Court to dereserve 134.2 sq km of Deopani Reserve Forest in Arunachal Pradesh in lieu of 163 sq km of dense forest area as Senzen Reserve Forest and also for the consequential relief.

    17. A detailed report has been filed by the Central Empowered Committee. The recommendations of CEC are given in Para 16 which we extract hereunder:

    “Keeping in view that (a) the extenuating circumstances under which the encroachment has taken place sixty years ago (b) these are eligible for regularisation in terms of MoEF's Guidelines dated 18-9-1990 and exempted from the payment of NPV pursuant to this Hon'ble Court's orders dated 28-3-2008 (2008) 7 SCC 126 and 9-5-2008 (2008) 7 SCC 133 (c) in lieu of the forest land to be dereserved in the present case, an area of 163 sq km of dense/very dense forest have been notified as Senzen Reserved Forest, and (d) MoEF has granted ‘in principle approval’ for the proposal, it is recommended that this Hon'ble Court may consider permitting dereservation of 134.20 sq km of Deopani Reserved Forest in the Lower Dibang Valley Project, District Roing, Arunachal Pradesh for regularisation of pre-1980 encroachments subject to the condition that formal approval under the FC Act for regularisation of encroachments and dereservation of reserved forest will be obtained.”

    18. On the recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee, this application is allowed in terms of the prayer made therein.

    Item 315: IAs Nos. 2741-42

    19. Due to lapse of time, the prayer made in these applications does not survive. IAs are, accordingly, dismissed.

    Item 316: IAs Nos. 2228-29, 2575-78

    20. At the request of Mr Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant, list these IAs on 16-9-2011.

    Item 317: IAs Nos. 3127-28

    21. At the request of the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, post these IAs next week.

    Items 318-20: IA No. 5 in SLP (C) No. 20154 of 2011, IA No. 3 in SLP (C) No. 21461 of 2011 and IAs Nos. 26-27 in SLPs (C) Nos. 21463-64 of 2011

    22. Post these IAs after four weeks. In the meantime, the applicants are directed to take steps to serve the unserved respondents through dasti.

    23. Interim order dated 15-7-2011 (2011) 14 SCC 297 to continue for a further period of four weeks.

    Item 321: IAs Nos. 1287, 1570-71, 1624-25, 1978, 2395, 2795-96

    24. As prayed, written submissions to the report of the Ministry of Environment and Forests may be filed by the learned amicus curiae before 16-9-2011. The applicants are also permitted to file their response to the report filed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests before 16-9-2011. List these IAs on 16-9-2011.

    Item 322: IA No. 972 in IAs Nos. 757, 1042-45, 2949 in 757 and IA No. … in IA No. 757

    25. Mr Sushil Kumar Jain, learned counsel appearing for the applicant resumed his arguments at 3 p.m and was on his legs when the Court rose for the day leaving the matter as part-heard. List on 16-9-2011 as part-heard.

    Items 323-26

    26. Not taken up today.

    Court Masters

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Centre For Environmental Law, World Wide Fund-India v. Union Of India And Others
    (Sep 9, 2011)