CASE BRIEF
Equivalent Citation: 2007(1)JKJ58
Maneka Gandhi
Vs.
State of J and K and Ors
Appellants: Maneka Gandhi
Respondent: State of J and K and Ors.
Decided On: 30.03.2006
FACTS:
1. Mrs. Maneka Gandhi, environmentalist, communicated the complaint of mushroom growth that is the sudden expansion of Charcoal Bhatties in Kathua district in Jammu and Kashmir and the damage that was being caused by the bhatties setup to the forests and environment, within the District.
2. Free for all manufacture of Charcoal was being carried on in those Bhatties
3. There being no regulation for setting up or running of these Bhatties resulted in free consent to set up the same, eventually causing damage to the forest by means of smuggling trees of the forest by Bhatti owners.
4. Negative impact was apparent as water resources in the Kandi area of Katua belt were drying up, downfall being the area was already short of water resources.
5. The communication was treated as public interest litigation and concerned official functionaries, including the Principal Conservator of Forests (PCCF), Chairman Pollution Control Board and Divisional Forest Officer, Kathua, were put on notice and were required to give their response to the complaint made by Mrs. Maneka Gandhi.
6. Officials admitted that Bhatties were located on the private land & they were in close vicinity of demarcated forest. It was also admitted that there was no regulation in force to control these Bhatties, which, admittedly were a source of damage to the forests and the environment.
7. Forest Department had taken steps and had requested the government for enacting a statutory Regulation to control the felling and transportation of timber and, manufacture and sale of Charcoal to save the Kandi Belt of District Kathua.
8. Secretary of the Pollution Board submitted that Board had received some complaints in which prompt action was taken and direction was given to Deputy Commissioner, Kathua for closure of Charcoal Bhatties.
ISSUE
Whether immediate remedial and preventive measures required to be taken in interest of general public to save the environment, ecology in area with regulation of unbridled trade of Charcoal?
ARGUMENTS
Mr. A.V. Gupta, Sr. Advocate had submitted that substantial quality of timber used for the charcoal Bhatties was being extracted from the demarcated forest. Bhatties were located on the periphery of demarcated forest causing an irreparable damage both to the forest and environment in the District as much as the illicit felling of trees even in the demarcated forest was being carried out, which was in violation of the Supreme Court orders in T.N. Goverdhan’s case. As a matter of fact, the whole area was being converted into a desert as the water resources were drying up and the greenery depleted.
PCCF, the Chairman of the Pollution Control Board and the Divisional Forest Officer, Kathua supported the factual position contained in the complaint of Mrs. Maneka Gandhi. They pointed out that there was no regulation or mechanism in place by which these Bhatties could be removed from the locations and the manufacture of Charcoal in those Bhatties banned. Divisional Forest Officer, Kathua, conceded that 60% of the bhatties were at arm’s distance from the boundary of the demarcated forest and a sizable number was even close to the government schools.
JUDGMENT
The bench comprising of B.A. Khan, Acting C.J. and Jai Pal Singh, J. Held the following:
1. Court directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to issue a public notice in print and electronic media, informing all owners/operators of Charcoal Bhatties in Kathua and Billawar Forest Divisions of Kathua and Jammu Districts to remove/shift their Bhatties, three kilometers away from the demarcated forest boundary, within two weeks from the publication of the notice, failing which operation of those Bhatties would be stopped and those Bhatties would be dismantled and the fire wood/charcoal, if any found, seized and confiscated.
In case any owner/operator puts up any resistance in such removal/dismantling operation, the authorities of the forest department would be at liberty to cause arrest of such violators with police help, for which Inspector General of Police, Jammu and Senior Superintendent of Police of Kathua and Jammu districts were directed to render all possible help to those authorities whenever and wherever needed or requisitioned.
A similar notice was to issued by the PCCF to owners and operators of the Charcoal Bhatties, which were found closely located to various government schools, any human habitation.
2. The State government was directed by the court to expedite the consideration and promulgation of the statutory regulation of the order by the Chief Secretary and to convene a meeting of all concerned official functionaries to take necessary steps in direction for the same.
3. The Deputy Commissioner was directed by the court to enforce the directions received by him from the Chairman Pollution Board and to take all necessary actions & co-ordinate the action along with Principal Chief Conservator Forests to ensure the compliance of the Court directions and removal of Bhatties, in case owners and operators fail to do so on their own.
4. The Divisional Forest Officer’s reason of not having the required staff strength to deal with the menace of timber smuggling from the demarcated forest result of which the operators/owners of these Bhatties were resorting to illegal felling, which was going unchecked as a result of which The Commissioner-Secretary Forest, was directed by the court to make available the required number of personnel of Forest Protection Force to PCCF for deployment in Kathua and Billawar Forest Divisions, to check and ensure that there was no illegal felling of trees or smuggling of any fire wood/timber, which was being used in these bhatties and what constitutes disobedience/breach of the orders passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in T.N Goverdhan’s case.
5. The Divisional Commissioner, Jammu, two Deputy Commissioners of Jammu and Kathua as also the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kathua and Jammu Districts were ordered to be made party respondents to the petition & were issued notice for their appearance.
6. The PCCF was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 15,000/- to the Court counsel for meeting the expenses of this litigation and to depute Sh. Brij Mohan Sharma, DFO, Kathua to him for assistance, as and when so required.
CONCLUSION
This case highlighted the need for maintaining and promoting forest productivity. It facilitates the conservation of biological diversity. As well as safeguarding and protecting environmental conditions as stated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in T.N Goverdhan’s case.
High court through its judgement laid down the need for regulation for the over felling and transportation of timber and, manufacture and sale of Charcoal causing enormous damage to the ecology and environment which was necessary for the public interest and protection of environment.