(1) EXEMPTION from filing O.T. is granted. (2) HEARD. The I.A. is dismissed. (3) THESE are the INDIAN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE filed by N.M.D.C. in which it is stated that it has acquired six leases in Bailadila area which is a forest land in which permission has been granted by the Central government to carry on mining operations. It is stated that the State of M.P. on 20/08/1998 has also granted the necessary permission but has observed that while cutting the trees special care should be taken to implement the order of this court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India and Others, 1997 (2) SCC 267 . (4) IT is clear that as far as this court is concerned, it had prohibited the carrying on of any non-forest activity in a forest area without the permission of the central Government. Now that the central Government has granted permission subject to the conditions which have been or may be imposed, the applicant would of course be at liberty to operate on the said mines. What was prohibited by this court was illegal cutting of trees and cutting of trees without the permission of the central government. It is nobodys case before us that cutting of trees in carrying on the mining operations in the present case would be environmentally hazardous or contrary to any law especially in view of the fact that an obligation has been cast on the applicant to carry out afforestation hopefully on an area greater or larger than the area on which the trees are to be cut. In this view of the matter, the permission to carry on the mining operations is granted. (5) WE further clarifying that the order dated 11/2/1997 passed in I.A. No. 60/97 in W.P. (C) No. 202/95 stands modified to that extent. These IAs in this regard stand disposed of leaving open the question as to the manner in which the compensatory afforestation is to be done. A comprehensive proposal in this regard will be placed before the court by the Ministry of Environment on the next date of hearing. For this purpose, the case to come up in the second week of January 2000 along with the Damoh matter. (6) PURSUANT to the order dated 2/08/1999 of this court in I.A. No. 424/99, Mr. A comprehensive proposal in this regard will be placed before the court by the Ministry of Environment on the next date of hearing. For this purpose, the case to come up in the second week of January 2000 along with the Damoh matter. (6) PURSUANT to the order dated 2/08/1999 of this court in I.A. No. 424/99, Mr. M.K. Sharma, Additional Inspector General of Forests who was appointed by this court and directed to go into the allegations made in I.A. No. 257/97 in W.P. (C) No. 202/95, has furnished his First Report. A copy of this Report has been given to Mr. S.K. Agnihotri. The Collector, Damoh is directed to file an affidavit within three weeks from today replying and/or dealing with the said Report and in particular with regard to the land at Village Singrampur stated to have been purchased by Shri Ratnesh Solomon and the felling of the trees on the said land. (7) TILL further orders, we direct subject to the orders in I.A. Nos. 419 and 420 that there shall be no felling of any tree in the State of M.P. and there will be no movement of any timber, without further orders of this court, from one district to another. (8) THE State of M.P. through the Chief Secretary should also within three weeks from today file an affidavit in response to the Report. (9) NOTICE of the Report may also go to Mr. Ratnesh Solomon who is at liberty to file such an affidavit as he may choose to do in response to this Report within three weeks from today. Copy of the Report will be supplied to him by the State of M.P. Service of notice on Mr. Solemn be effected through Mr. Agnihotri. (10) THIS I.A. and the other connected I.As. dealing with Damoh will be listed in the second week of January 2000. (11) ISSUE notice. (12) REPLY be filed within four weeks and rejoinder within two weeks thereafter. List after six weeks. (13) LIST in the second week of January 2000. In the meantime, the State of Karnataka will file its further response to the Status Report with regard to Thatkola Reserved Forest which has been filed by Mr. R MN Sahai. (14) AN application has been filed by Amicus Curiae in court which is taken on record. (15) ISSUE notice to the State of Rajasthan. (16) MR. In the meantime, the State of Karnataka will file its further response to the Status Report with regard to Thatkola Reserved Forest which has been filed by Mr. R MN Sahai. (14) AN application has been filed by Amicus Curiae in court which is taken on record. (15) ISSUE notice to the State of Rajasthan. (16) MR. Sushil Kumar Jain, Additional Adv. Genl. accepts notice. (17) REPLY be filed by 4th January, 2000. (18) NOTICE also to issue to the plaintiffs mentioned in Annx. A at page 11 of the application. Notice be served by the State of Rajasthan through Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain. Dasti service, in addition, is permitted. The State will also be at liberty to effect service on the plaintiffs through the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Alwar in whose court the cases are pending. (19) NOTICE is made returnable in the second week of January 2000. (20) TO come up in the second week of January 2000.