N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2018] 11 S.C.R. 654 · Decided: 14-09-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MADAN B. LOKUR · Disposal: IA disposed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
654
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 11 S.C.R.
       T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD
v.
    UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
(I.A. Nos. 1424-1425 of 2005)
in
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995)
SEPTEMBER 14, 2018
[MADAN B. LOKUR, S. ABDUL NAZEER AND
DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.]
Environmental Law:
Forest conservation – Interlocutory applications seeking
direction to the State/Authorities to ensure that in the forest, non-
forest activities (including mining operations) are not carried out
in the garb of lease by the licensee – Also sought initiation of criminal
proceedings against the erring persons/officials etc. – Central
Empowered Committee constituted by the Court – Committee found
that grant of mining in favour of the licensee in question, was in
violation of Forest Conservation Act and extraction of iron ore and
transportation thereof was in violation of approved mining plan
and also noted various other illegalities and irregularities –
Committee recommended recovery of sale proceeds, sale of
confiscated iron ore, criminal proceedings against the erring
officials and blacklisting of the licensee – State filed affidavit stating
actions taken in compliance of the recommendation of the Committee
– Held: Report of the Committee is accepted – State has taken
necessary steps – Applications, in so far as licensee is concerned,
are disposed of.
Disposing of the applications, the Court
HELD: The Report of the Central Empowered Committee
is accepted. From a reading of the Report of the CEC, it is
apparent that the licensee had flagrantly violated the law and had
[2018] 11  S.C.R. 654
                                                 654
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
655
carried out mining in the forest areas.  The affidavit of the State
Government reveals that the State Government itself was alive
to these violations and has taken necessary steps in the matter.
The State has taken action not only to stop mining but also to
initiate proceedings against the erring officials.  The affidavit of
the State shows that all mining activities in the forest areas have
been stopped long time back.  It is clear that steps have been
taken to recover the entire sale proceeds of the CMT of iron ore
that was mined and transported by the licensee.  It is also clear
that State Government has initiated disciplinary proceedings
against its officials who were found to be guilty of professional
misconduct.  Disciplinary enquiry has also been ordered against
the then Assistant Mining Officer, by the Mining Department of
the Government of Chhattisgarh.  The Department of Commerce
and Industry of the  State Government had already blacklisted
the licensee.  It is clear from the records that the confiscated
iron ore has been mined from the adjoining forest land.  The
authorities concerned are free to auction the aforesaid confiscated
iron ore in accordance with law.  Therefore, it is not necessary to
direct the CBI enquiry as prayed for in the applications.  The
applications are accordingly disposed of insofar as  the licensee
is concerned.  [Para 7] [662-D-H; 663-A]
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: I.A. Nos. 1424-1425 of
2005 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Harish N. Salve, Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Advs. A. D. N. Rao, Sudipto
Sircar, Siddhartha Chowdhury, Ms. Aparajita Singh (A.Cs.), Prashant
Bhushan, S. Shrivastava, Pranav Sachdeva, Siddharth Shukla,  Farrukh
Rasheed,  Apoorv Kurup,  A. C. Boxepatro, G. Kaushal, Siddharth Iyer,
S. Wasim A. Qadri, D. L. Chidanand, Devasis Bharuka, Ms. Suhasini
Sen, Ritesh Kumar, G. S. Makker, Ravindra Bana,   Mrs. Anil Katiyar,
Baijnath Patel, Gopal Singh, Kumar Milind, Baij Nath Patel,  P. S. Sudheer,
Advs. for the appearing parties.
 T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD v. UNION OF INDIA
AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
656
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 11 S.C.R.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
S. ABDUL NAZEER, J.
I.A. Nos. 1424-1425 of 2005
1. Mr. Bhupesh Baghel, M.L.A., has filed I.A. Nos. 1424-1425
of 2005 in the above writ petition seeking the following reliefs:
(i)   Direct the respondents 1 to3 herein to ensure that no non-
forest activities including mining operations are carried out
by the respondents 4 to 7 herein in the forests under the garb
of lease executed by the State of Chhattisgarh or permission
granted by the State of Chhattisgarh in their favour;
(ii)  Direct the respondents 1 to 3 to initiate criminal prosecution
of the respondents 4 to 7 herein as also other officials of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.