http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       04/03/1997

BENCH: J.S. VERMA, B.N. KIRPAL

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 1997 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.S. Verma Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.N.Kirpal Ashok Desai,  Attoney  General,  Altaf  Ahmed,  V.R.  Reddy, Additional Solicitor  Generals, N.N.  Goswami,  H.N.  Salve, Kapil Sibal,  Dushyant Dave,  Dr. Rajeev  Dhawan, P.S. Poti, T.L.V. Iyer,  Dr.  Shankar  Ghose,  Jayant  Das  Tapas  Roy, M.S. Nargolkar, Anil  B. Divan, Arun Jaitley, A. K. Ganguli, N.S. Hegde, P.K. Goswami,  B. Zaiwalla, K.K. Venogopal, G.L. Sanghi, C.S.  Vaidyanathan, Shankar Ghose, Dushyant A. Dave, D.D. Thakur,  M.L.  Jain.  O.P.  Sharma,  D.P.  Gupta,  Raju Ramachandran, Sr.  Advs., S. Wasim A. Qadri, A.D.N. Rao, Ms. Anil Katiyar, A.K. Sharma, A. Mariarputham, U. Hazarika, R.P Sarmah, Shakil  Ahmad, Kailash  Vasdev,  Gopal  Singh,  J.S. Attri, L.R.  Rath, Ms.  H. Wahi, Ms. S. Hazarika, K.J. John, Shanta Vasudevan, P.K. Manohar, S. Arvindh, V. Balachandran, Ms, B.  Sunita Rao,  T.V.S.N.  Chari,  Nikhil  Nayyar,  J.P. Verghese, S.R.  Setia, A.T.M.  Sampath, V.G.  Pragasam, S.K. Agnihotri, B.P.  Agarwal, Aruneshwar  Gupta, G. Prakash, Ms. Benna Prakash,  Ranjan Mukherjee,  R.K. Mehta,  B.S. Chahar, Ashok  Mat,   K.R.  Nagaraja,   K.K. Tyagi,  M.  Mishra,  A. Subhashini,  A.  Ranganadhan,  Rakesh  (Dwivedi,  Addi  adv. General) R.B.  Mishra, Adv.  for State  of U.P.,  H.K. Puri, Rajesh  Srivastava.  Ujjawal  Banerjee,  K.B.  Rohatagi,  Ms Aparna Rohtagi  Jiain, S.M. Jadhav,  H.S. Munjral, R.S. Suri Ms.  S.   Janani,  Prem  Malhotra,  D.S. Mehra,  B.B. Singh, T. Anil kumar,  D.P Gupta,  J.S. Manhas P.H. Parekh,  Sameer Parekh, Ms.  Indo Verma,  Amit Dhingra,  M.L. Lahoty,  Pawan Sharma,  Himanshu   Shekhar,  Rana   Mukherjee,  M.S. Sunita Mukherjee, Goodwill  Indeevar, P.P. Thipathy, Anil Agrawala, Raj Kumar  Gupta, H.V.P.  Sharma,  Rajesh,  Vijay  Hansaria, Sunil K. Jain J.K. Bhatia, C.K. Sasi D.L.N. Rao, Sunil Dogra U.K. Sagar,  .P.P.  Singh,  A.K. Panda,  N.C. Phukhar, Dayan Krishnan, Nikil  Nayar, K.J.  John, Joy  Joseph, Ms.  Malini Poduval, K.M.K.  Nair E.M.C.  Anam, Janes Koshy, S. Ravindra Bhat, D.K.  Mishra Naveen  R.  Nath  Ms.  Hetu  Arora,  Ajit Pudussery, Roy  Abraham, Ms.  Banby Krishnnan, Gopal Prasad, Ejaz Maqbool,  V. Chidambaresh  B.V. Deepak, Ramesh Babu MR. M.K.D Namboodri, Ms. C.K. Sucharita, Sushil Kumar Jain, R.K.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

Pareek Gopal Modi, A.P. Dhamija, Pradeep Aggarwal, Ms. Pinky Anand Ms.  Geeta Luthra,  D.N. Goburdhan,  R.K. Gupta,  K.K. Gupta,  Bijan  Ghosh,  A.S.N.  Dawn,  A.C.  Majmumdar,  B.K. Satita, Ms  Dipti Choudhary,  Sanjay Bhowmick, R.C. Gubrele, K.R. Gupta,  Vivek Sharma,  Ms. Nanita  Sharma, Ashok Sudan, Uday Kumar  Sagar, E.C.  Vidyasagar, R.C.  Verma  Ms.  Manik Karangawala, Rajiv Mehta, P.P. Singh, Ms. Rekha Pandey, L.R. Singh, K.L.  Janjani, D.M.  Nargolkar, Bharat  Sangal,  U.U. Lalit   (A.C) Ms.  Purnima Bhat,  Ms. Meenakshi Sakhardande, Mahender Vyas,  J.S. Manhas,  A.K. Sharma, Ms. Anil Katiyar, R.Sasiprabhu A.V. Palli, Zafar Shah, (Atul Sharma,), ADV for Ms. Rekha  palli, Ms.  Kavita Wadia, S.K. Bhattacharya. S.K. Dingra, S.K.  Agnihotri, B.P. Agarwal, G. Prakash, Ms. Beena Prakash, Ranjan  Mukherjee, Raj  kumar  Mehta,  M.A.  Krisha Moorthy,   J.B.    Ravi,   S. Balakrishnan,   R.N. Keshwani, Chandrakanta Nayak, Joseph Pookkatt, Advs. with them for the appearing parties. O R D E R S The following Order of the court was delivered T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v Union of India & Ors. [with W.P. (C) No. 171 of 1996 and W.P. (C) No. 897 of 1996] 1.   After hearing  Mr. Harish N., Salve, the learned Amicus Curiae,  learned   attorney  General   and  learned  counsel appearing for the States and other parties in these matters, it is  clear that  no substantial  variation in  the earlier order dated  12.12.1996 is required to be made as an interim measure;  and  that  some  minor  variation  to  the  extent indicated hereinafter  is all that is required to be done at present.      We are  satisfied that  there is  need to  constitute a High power Committee to oversee the strict and faithful in the  North eastern Region implementation of the orders of this court  and for  certain ancillary purposes. Accordingly we direct as under:- (1)  There shall be a committee as under:- (a)  Shri T.V. Rajeshwar, chairman; (b)  Shri R.N. Kaul, Retd. I.G of Forests      Member; and (c)  one representative nominated by the ministry of Environment and forests (MOEF) Member Secretary. Shri T.V.  Rajeshwar and  Shri R.N.  Kaul have  given  their consent for the purpose. (ii) This committee  shall oversee  preparation of inventory of all timber in all forms (including timber products (a)  lying in the forest or in transit depots, and (b)  lying in mill premises).      The inventory  should , wherever possible, indicate the origin and source of the timber.      The Committee  may for  this  purpose  select  suitable persons who  would be  made available by the concerned state Government at its request.      As far  as possible,  such inventory should be prepared within eight weeks from today.      (iii)     The   Committee    may,   if   it   considers appropriate, permit  the use  or sale  of any  part  of  the timber or  timber or  timber products.  Any  sale  shall  be effected through  the forest  corporation of the State under overall supervision of the committee. (iv)  The   net  sale   proceeds  after   deduction  of  the transaction related costs and payment of wages to the labour and staff  shall be deposited by the Forest Corporation in a designated account. The modalities will be worked out by the committee.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

(v)  The committee may, through the Amicus Curiae, apply for such  directions   from  time   to  time   as  it  considers appropriate. (vi) The MOEF  will make available as far as possible within a week suitable office space and provide secretarial and all other related facilities in Delhi (including local transport and  telecommunication)   befitting  the   stature  of   the committee.      The MOEF  will make  arrangements for and meet expenses of travel  of the  committee. All arrangements for stay etc. of the  Committee(outside Delhi)  as may be necessary, would be the responsibility of the state Govt. concerned.      The Assam Government will make similar office and other facilities available in Gauhati.      It is  for the  sake of  convenience at this stage that the central  Government and  the State Governments are being directed to make certain payments and meet all the expenses. However, the  question of  liability for  payment  of  these amounts  would  be  considered  at  the  final  hearing  and suitable directions  for the  purpose given  at  that  stage indication the  principle for  determining the liability for making the payment. 2.   It is  clarified that  the directions  contained in the order dated  12.12.1996 and  this order  would not  apply to minor forest produce, including bamboos, etc. 3.   The State  of Meghalaya  has asserted  in its affidavit that a significant quantity of timber is required for use in the state  itself by  the rural  tribal   population. It has also asserted  that there  is a loss of revenue to the state government on account of restrictions placed by the order of 12.12.1996 and  a large  number of  people of the state have been deprived  of the  employment. The  state is directed to file an affidavit with full and complete particulars of: i)   The quantity  of timber which comes from its forest for use by  the rural  tribal population, the extent to which it is made  available to  the rural tribal population including the terms on which it is so made available; ii)  the revenue derived by the State by way of royalty from the minerals, mines and forest areas, purchase tax on export of timber, sale value of timber drawn from the Govt. forests and the  extent and  quantity of such sale and the manner of sales; iii) The number  of wood  based industries  within the state and the number of persons employed in such industry. 4.   All unlicensed saw mills, veneer and plywood industries in the  state of  Maharashtra and the state of Uttar Pradesh are to  be closed  forthwith and  the State Government would not  remove   or  relax   the   condition   for   grant   of permission/licence for  the opening  of any  such saw  mill, veneer and  plywood industry and it shall also not grant any fresh  permission/licence   for  this   purpose.  The  chief Secretary of the State will ensure strict compliance of this direction and file a compliance report within two weeks. 5.   A total  of 5322.97  cubic meters  of timber  presently held by  the private  parties in  their stock purchased from the J  & K state forest corporation as per Annexure D to the affidavit dated  18th February,  1997 filed on behalf of the Government of  J &  K is permitted to be moved; and any such movement be  effected after  due certification,  consignment wise made  by the Managing director of the state corporation which will  include certification  that the  timber has come from state  forest corporation  sources(as per  para 6(a) at page 11  of the  earlier order dated 12.12.1996). The stocks of  kail,   chir  and  fir  in  the  depots  of  the  Forest corporation are  permitted to  be disposed  of by the Forest

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

corporation in  any manner  which would include movement and disposal of  the same  even outside  the state  as  per  the requirements as indicated in above said para 6(a) . All this would be done by the forest corporation itself.      The above  directions are  to be read a long with those contained in the order dated 12.12.1996. MINING MATTERS We direct that 1.   where the  lessee has not forwarded the particulars for seeking permission under the FCA, he may do so immediately; 2.   The    State  Government  shall  forward  all  complete pending applications  within a  period of 2 weeks from today to the Central Government for requisite decisions; 3.   applications received (or completed) hereafter would be forwarded within two weeks of their being so made. 4.  the   Central  Government  shall  dispose  of  all  such applications within six weeks of their being received. Where the  grant  of  final  clearance  is  delayed,  the  central Government may  consider the grant of working permissions as per existing practice. General directions      It is made clear that the order passed by this court in these matters,  including the order dated 12.12.1996 and the present order  shall be  obeyed and carried out by the union Government as well as the State Governments, notwithstanding any order  or direction  passed by a court, including a High court or Tribunal, to the contrary.      We further  direct the Registrar General to communicate the order  dated 12.12.1996  as well as the present order to the Registrars  of all  the High  courts  to  ensure  strict compliance. It  is also  clarified that the orders passed by this court  including the  order dated 12.12.1996 as well as the present  order to  the Registrars of all the High courts to ensure  strict compliance.  It is also clarified that the orders passed  by  this  court  including  the  order  dated 12.112.1996 and this order will apply to all autonomous Hill councils in  the North  Eastern States  as well as the Union Territories.      It is  made clear  that all  the concerned  authorities would, in  the meantime,  continue to  examine  the  various aspects of  the problems requiring solution and try to solve these problems  in collaboration with the central government and the  state Governments  an efficacious  exercise of this kind would  enable reduction  of the  area which may require judicial scrutiny and adjudication in these matters. Manjushree plantations ltd. & Ors. Etc. V. The State of Tamil Nadu & ors. etc. with M/s Malapuram Timbers V. District forest officer & Ors. I.R. Goelho (DEAD) By L.Rs. The State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. O R D E R      In modification  of the  earlier orders  in  the  civil Appeal Nos. 367-75 of 1977, 2457 of 1977 and 1344-45 of 1976 and Writ petition No. 202 of 1995 it is directed as under : [i]  As  far   as  shade  trees  in  the  Janmam  areas  are concerned, they  would be governed by para 4[a] of our order dated 12.12.1996 insofar as it applies to the State of Tamil Nadu. However, all trees so felled in the janmam areas shall be delivered by the Plantation to the State Govt. which will be free  to deal  with and  dispose of  the same.  The State Govt. Shall  , however,  keep a  record of  all  such  trees

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

received by  it . This will apply also to trees felled prior to the  interim orders  which are still in the possession of the plantations. [ii] Insofar as  fuel trees  are concerned,  we direct  that felling of  fuel trees  be carried on strictly in accordance with the  Report of TANTEA. After felling of fuel trees, the Plantations shall  submit the  account of  such  trees,  the plantations shall  submit the  account of  such trees to the State Govt.  They may  consume for their own use such number of fuel  trees as  are necessary  and give an account of the same to the State Govt. Any fuel trees not required  by them would be  surrendered by  them to  the State  Govt. And  the State Govt. would be free to deal with such trees. The State Govt. would be free to deal with such trees. The State Govt. shall, however,  maintain  an  account  of  any  fuel  trees received by it. [iii]     We further  clarify that  the direction that there will be  no further  expansion of  the plantation  so as  to involve encroachment  [by way  of clearing  or otherwise  of forest will] apply to the Janmam Lands as well. I.A. Nos. 6-14 of 1996 in CA Nos. 367-75 of 1977, I.A. No. 1 of 1996  in Ca No. 1457 of 1977, I.A. Nos. 3-4 of 1996 in CA Nos. 1344-45 of 1976 are allowed in the above terms.      The golf  course at  Kodaikannal and  Udagamandalam are permitted to  function subject  to the  condition  that  the District Collector and the Distt. Forest Officer of the area concerned are  associated with  the functioning  of the same till the approval of the Government of India is received.