The Karnataka High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to rightfully extend the forest clearance also over an extent of 12.97 ha out of the total 43.30 ha of land under ml 1671 with immediate effect. The Court observed that this is not the way a Welfare State should function especially, in matters that are governed by the statute law, namely, the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner submitted an application to the concerned Authority for the grant of forest clearance in respect of the land in question and the same is pending. There was a series of exchanges of communication between his client and the Authorities; several queries have been raised by the Authorities and responses have been sent by the petitioner.
A perusal of Annexure-R6 accompanying the Statement of Objections shows that there was an exchange of several communications and that the respondent-Authorities went on raising a series of objections on an installment basis during the period between 20.07.2020 and 18.07.2023.
Contention of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that necessary details regarding compensatory afforestation have already been provided to the respondent-Authorities as stated in paragraph 21 of the writ petition. He argued that the Authorities may be directed to communicate all queries to the petitioner in one go so that the petitioner can comply with all of them so that the Authorities can decide the pending application of the petitioner expeditiously and that the petitioner can go for the second stage of the process.
Contention of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the request made in the application filed by the petitioner normatively comprises two stages and that presently, the matter is at the first stage. He further submits that post-filing of the Statement of Objections, the Chief Conservator of Forests, Belgaum Division, Belgaum has sent a letter dated 02.11.2023 to the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bagalkot Division, Bagalkot, indicating the latest requirement of compensatory afforestation.
The Court observed that the learned counsel for the petitioner is justified in making this submission. The application of the petitioner cannot be kept pending for an indefinite period of time by raising queries one after the other. That is not the way a Welfare State should function especially, in matters that are governed by the statute law, namely, the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994.
The decision of the Court:
The Karnataka High Court, disposing of the petition, held that the respondent authorities shall process the application as expeditiously as possible and not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of such reply/response.
Case Title: M/S Doddannavar Brothers v State of Karnataka & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Krishna S Dixit
Case no.: WRIT PETITION NO. 7991 OF 2023 (GM-MM-S)
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Sandeep Deshmukh
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. S. S. Mahendra
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
