T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2018] 2 S.C.R. 744 · Decided: 16-02-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MADAN B. LOKUR · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
744
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 2 S.C.R.
IN RE:
T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD ETC.
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.
 (Interlocutory Application No. 3840 of 2014 in
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995)
FEBRUARY 16, 2018
[MADAN B. LOKUR AND DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.]
Environment – Forests – Felling of trees – Directions issued
by Supreme Court on 12.12.1996, to a large number of States
including State of Himachal Pradesh, inter alia that there will be no
felling of trees in any forest, public or private – However, there
were reports that State of Himachal Pradesh had passed orders
lifting ban on felling of trees – Supreme Court, while issuing notice
to State of Himachal Pradesh on 14.02.2000, also made it clear
that such orders, if passed, operation of the same were stayed and
no felling of trees be done – Application by State of Himachal
Pradesh that it may be permitted to carry out silviculture felling
including thinning and other cultural operations in Chil Pine, Khair
and broad-leaved forests only – After the application was filed,
Central Empowered Committee (CEC) directed to file its report –
Held: As per affidavits filed by State of Himachal Pradesh, some
amount of silviculture felling is necessary, because if no felling is
done then regeneration of trees is not as fast as it should be and
once the mature trees die after reaching their maximum life span,
there will be very few young trees to replace the old trees – With a
view to protect forests, felling of trees in India has been banned by
Supreme Court for more than two decades – However, on an
experimental basis silviculture felling of trees is permitted to a very
limited extent – Such felling should be monitored very carefully to
see whether it actually helps in the regeneration of forests or not –
In addition to the conditions laid down by CEC for felling of trees,
further conditions laid down to be strictly complied with – Principal
Chief Conservator of Forests shall be liable to ensure that felling is
done strictly in accordance with the orders of Supreme Court – To
this limited extent, orders dated 12.12.1996 and 14.02.2000 are
modified as far as the State of Himachal Pradesh is concerned.
  [2018] 2 S.C.R. 744
   744
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
745
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION :  Interlocutory Application
No. 3840 of 2014 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
J. S. Attri, Sr. Adv, A. D. N. Rao, (AC.), Siddhartha Chowdhury,
(AC),  Sudipto Sircar, Ms. Tulika Chikker, S. Wasim A. Qadri, Ravindara
Bana, Ms. Gargi Khanna, D. L. Chidanand, Zaid Ali, Ritesh Kumar, G.
S. Makker, Varinder Kumar Sharma, Chandra Nand Jha, Ms. Pragati
Neekhra, Advs. for the appearing parties.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. 1. By means of this application the State
of Himachal Pradesh has prayed that it may be permitted to carry out
silviculture felling including thinning and other cultural operations in
accordance with the Working Plan approved by the Government of India
up to an elevation of 1500 metres above Mean Sea Level (MSL) in Chil
Pine, Khair and broad-leaved forests only.
2. On 12.12.1996, this Court issued directions to a large number
of States.  The relevant directions with regard to the State of Himachal
Pradesh read as follows:
“1. There will be no felling of trees permitted in any forest, public
or private. This ban will not affect felling in any private plantation
comprising of trees planted in any area which is not a forest; and
which has not been converted from an earlier “forest”. This ban
will not apply to permits granted to the right holders for their
bonafide personal use in Himachal Pradesh.
2. In a ‘forest’, the State Government may either departmentally
or through the State Forest Corporation remove fallen trees or
fell and remove diseased or dry standing timber from areas other
than those notified under Section 18 or 35 of the Wild Life
Protection Act, 1972 or any other Act banning such felling or
removal of trees.
3. For this purpose, the State Government is to constitute an expert
committee comprising a representative from MOEF, a
representative of the State Government, two private experts of
eminence and the MD of the State Forest Corporation (as Member
IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD ETC. v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
746
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 2 S.C.R.
Secretary), who will fix the qualitative and quantitative norms for
the felling of fallen trees and d
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.