Assam (Bhorelli) Angling And ... vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3371 Gua

                                                                   Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010185072023




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                            Case No. : WP(C)/4888/2023

         ASSAM (BHORELLI) ANGLING AND CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION (ECO
         CAMP)
         VILL. TARAJAN POTASALI, P.O. GAMANI, DIST. SONITPUR, PIN-784103,
         ASSAM, REP. BY ITS HONORARY SECRETARY SRI TRIDIB PHUKAN, AGE
         66 YEARS S/O. LT. SIVA NATH PHUKAN, R/O. 10, CHITRACHAL,
         NABAGRAHA HILL ROAD, GUWAHATI-04, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
         REP. BY THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST
         DEPTT., GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

         2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD OF
         FOREST FORCE

          ASSAM
          ARANYA BHAWAN
          PANJABARI
          GUWAHATI-781037
          KAMRUP (M)
          ASSAM.

         3:THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

          NORTHERN ASSAM CIECLE
          TEZPUR
          PIN-784001
          ASSAM.

         4:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
                                                                      Page No.# 2/5

           SONITPUR WEST DVISION
           TEAPUR
           PIN-784001
           ASSAM.

           5:THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER

           CHARIDUAR FOREST RANGE
           CHARIDUAR
           PIN
           DIST. SONITPUR
           ASSAM.

           6:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
           WESTERN ASSAM WILDLIFE DIVISION AND FIELD DIRECTOR NAMERI
           TIGER RESERVE DOLABARI PIN 784027 TEZPUR ASSA

For the Petitioner (s)             : Mr. K.N. Choudhury, Sr. Advocate.
For the Respondent (s)             : Mr. A. Baruah, Advocate.

                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
                                    ORDER

28.08.2023

Issue notice making it returnable by 16th of October, 2023.

2. Mr. A. Baruah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondents. Extra copies of the writ petition be served upon him by 31.08.2023.

3. From a perusal of the records, it reveals that a meeting was held on 20.6.1995 at the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur for arriving at an understanding between the Department of Forest (Wild Life), Assam and the Petitioner Association for implementation and management of the Eco-Base Camp set up under the scheme 'Development of Angling Facilities in the North East Region' sponsored by the N.E. Council. In the Page No.# 3/5

said meeting, the various modalities were discussed as to how Eco-Base Camp could be implemented and managed under the scheme. In Clause 9 of the said minutes of the said meeting, it was agreed that in the event that the running of the camp becomes unviable the Department of Forest (Wild Life), Assam or the Petitioner would be at liberty to terminate the understanding by serving 3 (three) months prior notice.

4. Thereupon it appears from the records that certain proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner for which an Offence Report No.CH 35 dated 25.1.2020 was made. The Offence Report No.CH 35 was forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tezpur, Sonitpur by the Range Officer, Chariduar Range, Chariduar dated 3.2.2020. The Petitioner being aggrieved preferred a Writ Petition before this Court which was registered and numbered as W.P.(C) No. 3745/2021.

5. This Court vide an order dated 18.8.2021 after taking into account the various aspects observed that no coercive measures on the basis of the Offence Report No. CH 35 dated 25.1.2020 of Chariduar Revenue Station Range, Chariduar shall be taken by the Respondents therein upon the Petitioner alongwith the members of the Petitioner Society.

6. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of that prior thereto, another Writ Petition was filed by the Petitioner being W.P.(C) No. 614/2021, wherein the Petitioner challenged the seizure made by the Divisional Forest Officer, Sonitpur vide the Communication dated 16.1.2021.

7. Both the writ petitions were disposed of vide the judgment and order Page No.# 4/5

dated 30.3.2023. While disposing of the said writ petitions, this Court duly observed at paragraph No. 23 of the said judgment that the actions on the part of the Forest Department also indicates malafide on the part of the certain officers of the Department. This aspect could be seen from paragraph No. 23 of the said judgment which is reproduced hereinunder :

"23. That apart, this Court is also of the view that in the wake of availability of a number of communications by none other than the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India regarding the efforts taken by the petitioner- Association to protect the environment and forest and also for increasing the numbers of Mahseer in the hatchery and by making awareness camps in the form of competitions, the present action impugned in this two writ petitions appears to be an outcome of a mechanical exercise which also indicates mala fide on the part of certain officers of the Department. The official communications also indicate that the activities of the petitioner-Association have also reduced the poaching activities. The said observation is a very significant one made by none other than the Central Government representative which, this Court, gives due importance."

8. This Court vide the said judgment and order dated 30.3.2023 further taking note of the facts and circumstances set aside and quashed the Offence Report No. CH/35 dated 25.1.2020 issued by the Divisional Officer, Sonitpur and forwarded by the Range Officer, Chariduar Forest Range, Chariduar. The interim order so passed as mentioned hereinabove on 18.8.2021 was made absolute.

9. Thereupon the impugned Communication was issued on 12.6.2023 by the Divisional Forest Officer, Western Assam Wild Life Division and Field Director, Nameri Tiger Reserve whereby Clause 9 of the minutes of the meeting dated 20.6.1995 was invoked.

10. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, the learned Senior Counsel submits that not only Page No.# 5/5

the relevant facts were taken into consideration which on the face of it shows malice in law but there is also nothing mentioned in the said Communication that the Eco Base Camp had become unviable for exercising the jurisdiction under Clause 9 of the minutes of the meeting dated 20.6.1995. He therefore, submits on the face of it the Communication dated 12.6.2023 is contrary to the minutes of the meeting held on 20.6.1995 apart from being also inconsistent with the provisions of law.

11. Mr. A. Baruah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Forest Department submits that he would like to take instructions in that regard.

12. This Court upon duly perusing the materials on record is prima facie of the opinion that there is no mention in the Communication dated 12.6.2023 laying down the foundation for invoking Clause 9 of the minutes of the meeting dated 20.6.1995. Under such circumstances, this Court till the next date so fixed directs that no action be taken pursuant to the Communication dated 12.6.2023.

13. List accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant