JUDGMENT : I.A. Nos. 2079-2080, 2301-2303, 2760 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 and I.A. No. 2856 in I.A. Nos. 2079-2080 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 with W.P. (C) No. 301 of 2008 1. List after summer vacation for directions. I.A. No. 1137 in I.A. No. 826 in I.A. No. 566 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 2. List on 30-4-2010. I.A. No. 1631 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 3. The applicant, M/s Ambiga Timber Corporation is having sawmills in the industrial area at Chikmagalur, Karnataka. Though these mills are at a distance of less than 8 kilometres from the forest area, these are situate in the approved industrial area. The authorities may consider his applications for licences and if otherwise eligible, the applicant may be considered for grant of permission. 4. The I.A. is disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 1681, 1790 and 2097 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 5. The applicant, M/s J.H. Business India Limited is having a khair wood based industry in the State of Haryana which is sealed in pursuance of this Court's orders. The applicant submits that khair wood is now available in abundance in the market from legalised sources and is sold under the supervision of the Forest Department. The CEC has examined the question of feasibility and submitted its report. It has suggested that an assessment could be made in regard to the State's requirement and the applicant's petition could be considered by the State Level Committee, constituted by the CEC and appropriate orders could be passed on the applicant's request within a reasonable time. 6. Let that be so. 7. The IAs are disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 2211 in I.A. Nos. 1424-1425, 2649, 2811-2812 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 with W.P. (C) No. 469 of 2005 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 388 of 2009 in Ms Nos. 1424-1425 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995. 8. I.A. Nos. 2211 in I.A. Nos. 1424-1425, 2649, 2811-2812 9. Further report from the CEC on the allegations of cutting of trees is awaited. Contempt Petition (C) No. 388 of 2009 10. The contempt petition is moved by the original petitioner alleging that 884 trees were cut even after the prohibition order passed by this Court, apparently on the basis of same permission purportedly given by the Additional Collector. Further report from the CEC on the allegations of cutting of trees is awaited. Contempt Petition (C) No. 388 of 2009 10. The contempt petition is moved by the original petitioner alleging that 884 trees were cut even after the prohibition order passed by this Court, apparently on the basis of same permission purportedly given by the Additional Collector. This petition is also referred to the CEC. W.P. (C) No. 469 of 2005 11. It is alleged that more than 6000 trees are cut by BALCO. The CEC may get this fact too verified in its finding report. 12. List in the first week of August, 2010. 13. Liberty to move when report is filed by the CEC. I.A. Nos. 2228-2229, 2575-2576, 2577-2578, 2320, 2333-2334, 2414-2416, 2622-2624, 2813, 2640-2641 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995, I.A. No. 2678 in 2362-2363 and 2776 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995, I.A. Nos. 2805, 2846 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995, I.A. Nos. 2817-2819 in I.A. No. 828 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995, I.A. No. 2847 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995, SLP (C) Nos. 5044-5045 of 2010, SLP (C) CC Nos. 5816-5817 of 2010. 14. List after two weeks.