Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1624 (HP)

Court on its own motion v. State of H. P.

2015-11-03

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT : MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, J. 1. In terms of the order, dated 27th October, 2015, passed by this Court, the Deputy Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala and other Officers (respondents herein) were directed to appear in person before this Court on 28th October, 2015, after noticing the news item, published in the newspaper “The Tribune” in its issue, dated 26th October, 2015, read with an e-mail received in the Registry from Ghazala Abdullah, on whose letter the instant Public Interest Litigation was diarized. 2. Mr.Aman Sood, learned Amicus Curiae, stated that he has visited the area and submitted his report. We have perused the report. The report in itself shows that the learned Amicus Curiae had made strenuous efforts in visiting various sites, as delineated in the report. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned Amicus Curiae stated that the respondents have failed to prevent the illicit felling of the trees in the area in question. 4. The Learned Advocate General submitted that the guidelines have been framed in regard to marking/felling of the trees. The said guidelines are being followed by the concerned Authorities by putting marks on the identified trees before issuing final orders for the felling of the trees so that no loss is caused to the Government or to the public exchequer. 5. The learned Advocate General further submitted that the news item supra is not factually correct for the reason that the said deodar tree was not green but was a dried one. He further submitted that, in the instant case, the exercise was undertaken by the Authorities concerned in terms of the guidelines before including the tree in question in the list of identified trees worth felling. Therefore, it was submitted that the respondents have not committed any breach. 6. The learned Advocate General was asked to furnish a copy of the guidelines which are being followed by the concerned Authorities in order to declare forest trees of various species as dried trees. The learned Advocate General furnished a copy of the said guidelines on 29th October, 2015. 7. The Deputy Commissioner of a District is the administrative head of a District and the entire district administration spins around him and therefore, is responsible for the smooth functioning of the administration in the entire District. The learned Advocate General furnished a copy of the said guidelines on 29th October, 2015. 7. The Deputy Commissioner of a District is the administrative head of a District and the entire district administration spins around him and therefore, is responsible for the smooth functioning of the administration in the entire District. On the other hand, the Superintendent of Police of a District is responsible to maintain the law and order in the District. He is under legal obligation to prevent the crimes in his jurisdiction and in case any crime is noticed, he is bound to draw action against the perpetrator, as warranted under law. 8. After saying so, coming to the instant case, once it was reported either by news item published in the newspaper or through e-mail, it was the duty of the Deputy Commissioner concerned to ascertain whether the said tree was green or otherwise and in order to arrive at a conclusion, he should have sought opinion of an expert, which, he has not done. Similarly, no action has been taken by the concerned Superintendent of Police and by the Authorities of the Forest Department including the Principal Secretary (Forests), to the Government of H.P. and the Chief Conservator of Forests, Himachal Pradesh. Therefore, prima facie, we are of the view that the orders passed by this Court from time to time are not being complied with in letter and spirit. 9. In the given circumstances read with the order passed by this Court from time to time, especially, on 5th June, 2015 and 23rd June, 2015, we deem it proper to direct the concerned Deputy Commissioner to the following effect: (a) To obtain expert opinion to the effect whether the said tree was green or otherwise, after examining the stump of the tree in question; (b) To examine and report whether the concerned Authorities have followed the guidelines/mechanism in place while marking the trees, including the tree in question, as dried; (c) Whether the orders passed by this Court from time to time in the instant writ petition are complied with in letter and spirit by all the Sub Divisional Magistrates, Tehsildars, Naib Tehsildars and other State functionaries working under his control. 10. 10. In addition to above, we also deem it proper to pass the following directions: (a) All the respondents are directed to show cause why action be not drawn against them for non-compliance of the orders passed by this Court from time to time. (b) The Superintendent of Police, Kangra at Dharamshala is directed to obtain a report from the Police Station concerned whether any complaint was received/registered about the felling of the tree in question and what action was drawn on the said complaint. (c) The Superintendent of Police is also directed to submit a report as to how many cases have been lodged qua illicit felling of the trees right from 2nd June, 2015. (d) The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Himachal Pradesh, being the head of the Forest Department, is directed to ensure strict compliance of the orders passed by this Court from time to time in this writ petition. 11. The learned Amicus Curiae also pointed out that Shri Chaman Lal, Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Dharamshala was performing his duties with sincerity, but he came to be transferred and now, the charge of the office of the Executive Officer has been given to Shri Joginder Singh, an Engineer. Therefore, the learned Amicus Curiae prayed that an officer fulfilling the requisite eligibility is required to be posted as Executive Officer of the Municipal Council, Dharamshala, with independent charge. He further stated that as per e-mail received, Shri Joginder Singh, who is having the charge of Executive Officer and accompanied him during his visit, is having interest and is also one of the alleged violators. 12. In view of the above, the concerned State Authorities, including the Deputy Commissioner, are directed to post a competent, efficient and sincere Officer, having the requisite eligibility and qualification, as Executive Officer of the Municipal Council, Dharamshala, with independent charge of the said office, within one week from today and report compliance on the next date of hearing. 13. Status reports/replies, as indicated above, be filed by all the respondents, including the Deputy Commissioner and the Superintendent of Police, within two weeks from today. 14. 13. Status reports/replies, as indicated above, be filed by all the respondents, including the Deputy Commissioner and the Superintendent of Police, within two weeks from today. 14. It is made clear that the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Himachal Pradesh, the Deputy Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala and the Superintendent of Police, Kangra at Dharamshala are personally responsible for any deviation from the directions passed by this Court in the instant writ petition from time to time. 15. Mr.R.L. Sood, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the interveners, argued that the “Khair” trees are being allowed to be felled by the Forest Department of the Government for extracting “Katha” which has medicinal value, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India and others, (2009) 17 Supreme Court Cases 534. Therefore, Mr.Sood prayed that the “Khair” trees may be allowed to be felled in view of the judgment of the Apex Court and that the orders passed by this Court from time to time in the instant petition may be clarified. 16. Accordingly, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court supra, we clarify that the orders passed by this Court in this writ petition shall not be applicable to the “Khair” specie and that the felling of the said specie of trees shall be as per the directions passed by the Apex Court. 17. We place on record a word of appreciation for the efforts made by the learned Amicus Curiae. 18. Before parting with, we may place on record, as we have already observed in our earlier orders that human sustenance on the Earth is possible only if the trees sustain here. Trees can be termed as attire of the mother earth. Here, we may also remind of the words of Bryce Nelson, who said: “People who will not sustain trees will soon live in a world that will not sustain people.” List on 18th November, 2015.