Madras High Court
M/S.Vaira Vibinam (P) Limited Co vs The Union Of India on 7 March, 2025
W.P.(MD).No.6231 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
W.P.(MD)No.6231 of 2025
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.4584 & 4585 of 2025
M/s.Vaira Vibinam (P) Limited Co.,
Represented by one of its Directors,
P.Narendran. ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Union of India,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of Environment,
Forest and Climate Change,
Indira Paryavarn Bhavan,
Jorbagh Road,
New Delhi 110 003.
2. The Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (FC),
O/o. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,
Velachery Road, Guindy,
Chennai 600 032
3. The District Forest Officer and Wildlife Warden,
Tirunelveli Division,
NGO 'A' Colony North Main Road,
Tirunelveli - 627 007.
4. The Forest Ranger,
Sivagiri Forest Range Office,
Tirunelveli Forest Division,
Tenkasi District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
1/12
W.P.(MD).No.6231 of 2025
5. Jackson,
Forester,
Sivagiri Forest Range Office,
O/o. Sivagiri Forest Range Officer,
Tirunelveli Forest Division,
Tenkasi District.
6. Pradeep,
Forest Guard,
Sivagiri Forest Range Office,
O/o. Sivagiri Forest Range Officer,
Tirunelveli Forest Division,
Tenkasi District.
7. Mariappan,
Forest Watcher,
Sivagiri Forest Range Office,
O/o. Sivagiri Forest Range Officer,
Tirunelveli Forest Division,
Tenkasi District.
8. S.P.Balasubramaniya,
Anti Poaching Watcher,
Sivagiri Forest Range Office,
O/o. Sivagiri Forest Range Officer,
Tirunelveli Forest Division,
Tenkasi District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from denying the
petitioner, his family members, servants and labourers from using vehicular
transport along the existing mamool pathway or coupe mud road to gain
access of the petitioner's patta Estate lands known as “Elatheri Estate” from
the entry point namely Sivagiri Forest Check post in Sivagiri Taluk leads up
to Elatheri Estate in S.Nos. 920, 921, 922, 923, 924 of Sivagiri Taluk, Tenkasi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
2/12
W.P.(MD).No.6231 of 2025
District by considering the representation sent by the petitioner dated
04.12.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam
For Respondents : Mr.P.Paulpandi (R1)
Central Govt. Standing Counsel
Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan (R2 & R3)
Addl. Govt. Pleader
ORDER
The instant writ petition has been filed to forbear the respondents from
denying the petitioner, his family members, servants and labourers from using
vehicular transport along the existing mamool pathway or coupe mud road to
the petitioner's patta Estate lands known as “Elatheri Estate” from the entry
point namely Sivagiri Forest Check post in Sivagiri Taluk leading up to
Elatheri Estate in S.Nos. 920, 921, 922, 923, 924 of Sivagiri Taluk, Tenkasi
District, by considering the representation sent by the petitioner dated
04.12.2024.
2. Heard the learned counsel on either side. Since no adverse order is
going to be passed against the private respondents in this writ petition, notice
to them is dispensed with.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the
subject property and it is bounded by the reserved forest land comes within
the jurisdiction of Tirunelveli Forest Division with the pathway access to the
width of 2.0 mtrs., from the plain land ie., from the Forest Check post of
Sivagiri Forest Range, Tenkasi District. From the date of purchase of the
land, some illegal minded officials are not allowing ingress and egress to the
Estate, called “Elatheri Estate”. It is also ascertained by the second
respondent that the said estate is enclosure to Sivagiri Reserved Forest and it
has an admitted pathway for a width of 1.50 mtrs. The petitioner is
performing organic farming aims to conserve the environment, for which the
petitioner has engaged 88 employees in the estate, out of which 65 are
permanent and 20 to 25 are temporary employees.
4. The further case of the petitioner is that the employees of the
petitioner and others are struggling without proper road by means of
motorable transport facility and the respondents 5 to 8 illegally started to
prevent all labours to enter into the forest carrying loads on their heads while
riding two-wheelers, within the limits of the petitioner estate. The
respondents 1 to 4 have to give pathway right by expanding and permitting
the employees to use motorcycle for the estate activities and its welfare, since
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
the width of the pathway even according to the Forest Department is 1.5 mtrs.
The petitioner made a representation on 14.09.2023 to the respondents 1 to 3.
However, the same has not been considered. Therefore, the petitioner filed
this writ petition seeking for right of pathway by means of motorable
transport facility.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that if the
vehicles are not permitted to use for the ingress and egress of the estate, it
will be very difficult for the employees of the estate and if the employees fall
sick and suffered snakebite, it is very difficult for them to reach even the
nearest hospital. Hence, he prayed that the prayer sought for by the petitioner
can be considered which would benefit the petitioner and its employees.
6. On the contrary, the learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the labourers
are also not residing there as claimed by the petitioner. He would further
submit that there is no existing motorable pathway as claimed by the
petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner continue to access their lands
only on foot.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
7. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of
the respondents 1 to 3 would further submit that a similar prayer in a Writ
Petition in W.P.(MD).No.22037 of 2017 was made and this Court had directed
the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner therein dated
03.10.2017 and pass appropriate orders. This Court after hearing the parties
concerned and after analysing the various orders and the orders passed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court had held that there is no infirmity in the permission
granted for movement of materials only by head load and not to use any
motorable vehicles. The learned Judge had held that any intrusion into the
forest area in any manner will disturb and affect the flora and fauna and its
natural habitant.
8. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of
the respondents 1 to 3 would also rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court made in W.P.(MD).Nos.6683 & 7161 of 2010
dated 01.11.2018 and he would submit that the petitioner challenging the
notification issued by the Government declaring the area as a Reserve Forest
and which area was proposed to be a Tiger Reserve Forest had in clear terms
held that in such an event, the Government cannot be directed to consider the
request of the petitioners for a motorable road way and advised that their
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
existing right would only be protected and which has also been conferred
under the said notification i.e., the petitioners therein was entitled to use only
one meter pathway and nothing more. He would submit that the Hon'ble
Division Bench had weighed the public interest over the private interest.
9. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of
the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that similar litigation have been initiated
by various persons and such persons have also been unsuccessful. He would
submit that another attempt was also made by a group of persons to enter the
Reserve Forest using a light motor vehicle endangering flora and fauna etc.
He would further submit that it is not only the duty of the Government, it is
also the duty of the private individuals to protect the flora and fauna of the
forest that too a reserved forest declared to be a 'Tiger Reserve', which is
endangered and found inside the flora and fauna, which will also endanger
their very existence, if the vehicles are permitted to be used inside the Forest.
Hence, he would seek dismissal of the writ petitions filed by the petitioners.
10. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned
counsels appearing for their respective parties and perused the materials
available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
11. The Writ Petitioner had sought for a right to use the pathway by
using the light motor vehicle. The Government has declared Sivagiri Forest to
be a Reserve Forest. The Government in G.O(MS).No.21, Forests and
Fisheries, dated 08.01.1980 declaring various survey numbers in Sivagiri
Independent Sub Taluk, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tiruneveli District, to be a
Reserve Forest.
12. A Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, while dealing with the
similar issue, ie., the claim of the petitioner with reference to the pathway that
was held to be the admitted rights is only to a pathway measuring only 1.5
meter and weighing the public interest over the private interest had held that
the Court cannot pass an order leading to the destruction of forest at the
instance of the persons, who are seeking to expose their private interest.
13. It is pertinent to note that the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 12,
Environment and Forests (FR.5), 4th February 2015 had declared the range to
be Reserved Forest in Tirunelveli District as 'Nellai Wild Life Sanctuary'
under the Wild Life (Protection) Act. A reading of the said Government order
would also indicate that the Government had notified certain extent of area as
Nellai Wild Life Sanctuary as early as in the year 1980.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
14. After considering the various factors, particularly, the importance of
flora and fauna of the area, the Government had resolved to issue a
notification under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 declaring the said area to
be a Reserve Forest. Under the said Government orders, boundaries have
been fixed and admittedly the lands belonging to the petitioner fall within the
said boundary. The said Government order also envisages the admitted rights
in Annexure to the said Government order including the right of pathway
such as National Highways, State Highways, Estate Rules, E.B.Rules, etc.
The said admitted rights do not include the pathway that is claimed by the
petitioner. The pathway had already been notified under the earlier
Government order declaring the Nellai Wild Life Sanctuary.
15. Even assuming that the said pathway declared under the said
Government order is also extendable to the admitted rights in the present
Government order, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court discussed supra
indicates that when the right of pathway notified under the earlier
Government order is only a one meter wide pathway, the petitioner cannot
seek to claim the right of using the pathway as motorable road.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
16. When the Government order in Government in G.O(MS).No.21,
Forests and Fisheries, dated 08.01.1980 in which the Nellai Wild Life
Sanctuary was notified giving of rights of pathway which had been held to be
only 1.5 mtr., in width, the petitioner cannot claim the right of a motorable
pathway using the light motor vehicle which would be more that one meter in
width, that too, particularly, when the entire area had been now notified as a
Reserve Forest. Hence, I do not find any merits in this Writ Petition to
entertain even to grant of a Mandamus to consider their petition filed by the
petitioner in the year 2022.
17. For the aforesaid findings and reasonings, I do not find any merits
in this Writ Petition and accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.
However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
07.03.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
sm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
TO:-
1. The Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (FC),
O/o. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,
Velachery Road, Guindy,
Chennai 600 032
2. The District Forest Officer and Wildlife Warden,
Tirunelveli Division,
NGO 'A' Colony North Main Road,
Tirunelveli - 627 007.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
sm
Order made in
Dated:
07.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/04/2025 04:34:56 pm )
