JUDGMENT : Bansi Lal Bhat, J. 1. Transfer of 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land in terms of Government Order No. 242/FST of 1998 dated 10-6-1998 is assailed through the medium of instant Public Interest Litigation. The grievance projected in the petition is that neither the forest land could be utilized for setting up of a colony nor the same could be transferred to JDA. It is alleged that the State Government had passed a resolution asking the JDA to acquire land across Tawi River to construct a Muslim Migrants Colony. Land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas belonging to Forest Department came to be transferred in terms of Government Order dated 10-6-1998. Respondent No. 2, on 18-4-2002 directed transfer of the aforesaid forest land to JDA by 30th April, 2002. Respondent No. 2 sent a D.O. letter dated 23-5-2002 directing territorial DFO Jammu to immediately handover the said forest land to JDA Jammu who, in turn, directed his subordinates to handover the said land by 30-5-2002 positively. It is alleged that around one million people of Jammu would have to suffer the consequences in the shape of destruction of forests and greenery around the city. Instances in the past involving destruction of forest area in Trikuta Nagar, Bagh-e-Bahu, Gandhi nagar have been cited in this regard to show and demonstrate plunder of forests and damage done to ecology by deforestation, moreso, as afforestation had been taken up with the aid of World Bank. The impugned order is assailed on the ground that there is no lawful objective to acquire forest land and transfer the same to JDA. It is contended that there is no nexus between the impugned order and the object sought to be achieved; that this is a colourable exercise of power hard hitting the interests of people of Jammu and resulting in destruction of environment by Act of State as more than 15000 trees and forest nursery would stand demolished and also result in breach of Order of Hon'ble Apex Court prohibiting destruction of forest trees from forest land. The impugned orders are alleged to be emanating from mala fides issued with ulterior motives, discriminatory and in violation of the rules and procedure that was required to be adopted in such a case. The impugned orders are alleged to be emanating from mala fides issued with ulterior motives, discriminatory and in violation of the rules and procedure that was required to be adopted in such a case. The petitioner seeks quashment of the impugned order with direction to respondents to stop transfer of forest land to JDA and further directed the respondents to cancel all previous transfers of forest land to JDA or individuals. Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and 6 pleaded that the land already stands transferred and handed over to respondent No. 5 in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Jammu and Kashmir Forest Conservation Act of 1997 on 6-6-2002 prior to the filing of the writ petition. Thus, the PIL had been rendered infructuous. It is pleaded that the scheme for developing a satellite township near Sidhra was conceived prior to 1990. After identifying the area, a notification for acquiring of land for developing the satellite township was issued in 1993 and the land was acquired from different individuals by the State Government. Around 600 kanals of Forest land in the vicinity of the proposed satellite township and land alongside the river Tawi was also requisitioned by respondent No. 5. The area of 517 kanals was transferred to respondent No. 5 for non-forest purposes after following the procedure. Averments in the PIL in regard to demolition of trees and plantation raised by social forestry project on the aforesaid land have been denied. It is also denied that the land was transferred for setting up of a Muslim Migrant Colony as alleged in the petition. Respondent No. 5 has pleaded that 623 kanals 10 marks of land stands transferred to respondent No. 5 for construction of New Jammu Township in terms of the impugned order. It is further pleaded that in terms of letter dated 22-5-2002, Secretary Forest Department was directed to deposit cost of land at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per Kanal and directions were made to hand over possession to JDA which has been complied with and mutation in regard to the transfer of land has also been attested, other averments in the petition have been denied. 2. 10,000/- per Kanal and directions were made to hand over possession to JDA which has been complied with and mutation in regard to the transfer of land has also been attested, other averments in the petition have been denied. 2. OWP No. 935/2004 which has been clubbed with this PIL in terms of order dated 2-12-2014, has been filed by Jammu Dental Charitable Trust through its settler Surjeet Singh Khurana claiming that pursuant to its request for allotment of land at Sidhra for setting up of a Dental College, land measuring 100 kanals situated at Village Sidhra was allotted in its favour and in terms of letter dated 19-9-2002, Executive Engineer JDA Division Jammu was directed to hand over possession of such land to petitioners for establishment of Dental College. It is further averred, in the petition that actual and physical possession of 100 kanals of land falling under Khasra No. 99 Min situated at village Sidhra was handed over to petitioner through Surjeet Singh Khurana who had deposited Rs. 5.00 lacs determined in accordance with the rates prevalent in the vicinity. Subsequently, petitioner was informed that the request for formal allotment of 100 kanals of land at the above place has not been agreed to by the Board of Directors of JDA and petitioner was directed to surrender the land to respondent No. 4 within 15 days. Aggrieved thereof, petitioner assailed the impugned order on the grounds enumerated in the petition. 3. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 contested the petition primarily on the ground that the case of allotment of land in question was placed before the Board of Directors of JDA on 19-01-2004 and the Board had not agreed to allot the said land for establishment of Dental College by the petitioner. It was pleaded that in consequence of aforesaid decision of the: Board deposit of Rs. 5.00 lacs by petitioners as token amount had been refunded to petitioners. It was further pleaded that the physical possession of the land in question had always remained with respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as the order of proposed allotment in favour of petitioners was subject to final approval of Board of Directors of JDA which had declined approval. 4. 5.00 lacs by petitioners as token amount had been refunded to petitioners. It was further pleaded that the physical possession of the land in question had always remained with respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as the order of proposed allotment in favour of petitioners was subject to final approval of Board of Directors of JDA which had declined approval. 4. COA (w) No. 61/2007 has been filed by the petitioners of OWP No. 935/2004 against officials of JDA alleging that the respondents therein were trying to forcibly take possession of the land allotted in favour of the petitioners which has been allotted to some other person thereby violating the status quo order passed by this Court. This development is stated to have taken place after the petitioners declined to surrender possession of land measuring 100 kanals at village Sidhra in favour of respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 5. The matters being inter-connected, were taken up together for consideration. 6. A glance at the supplementary affidavits filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 brings it to fore that the Government Order dated 10-6-1998 regarding transfer of 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land to JDA for setting up of new township at Sidhra was not translated into action and physical possession of the land was not handed over to JDA. This stand taken by respondent Nos. 1 and 2, i.e. the State Government and the Hon'ble Chief Minister is specific on the point that delivery of physical possession of 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land to JDA was not effected in pursuance to order of transfer and such order remained only on paper. However, Additional Secretary Housing and Urban Development Department has taken a different stand in its supplementary affidavit by stating that Surjeet Singh Khurana was avoiding to surrender 100 kanals out of the aforesaid 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land to JDA or Forest Department, though Jammu Dental Charitable Trust and Trustees thereof had no right over this land on account of refusal of Board of Directors of JDA to accord approval to the proposed allotment of hundred kanals of land in favour of the aforesaid Trust. This would suggest that Jammu Dental Charitable Trust had taken/retained pos session on the strength of interim order dated 4-11-2004 passed in OWP No. 935/2004. This would suggest that Jammu Dental Charitable Trust had taken/retained pos session on the strength of interim order dated 4-11-2004 passed in OWP No. 935/2004. Since contradictory stands were taken by HUDA and Forest Department, respondents were directed to file fresh affidavit regarding present status of subject-matter of the petition. 7. Respondent No. 3 has filed supplementary affidavit stating therein that out of 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land, an area of 517 kanal 10 marlas has been handed over to JDA on 6-6-2013 and rest of 106 kanals is in possession of Forest Department. Breakup of the Survey numbers has been given in the affidavit. 8. JDA has filed status report stating therein that land measuring 517 kanal 10 marlas only out of land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas had been handed over to JDA by DFO Jammu on 6-6-2002. Remaining 106 kanal continued to be in physical possession of Forest Department. It is further stated in the status report that land measuring 200 kanals had been transferred to Batra Hospital but the same was still lying vacant. 100 kanals was proposed to be allotted to Ravish Trehan of Jammu Dental Charitable Trust but the same was not approved by Board of Directors of JDA. Physically this land was lying vacant on spot. 9. In the supplementary affidavit filed by Additional Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, it is stated that vide order dated 1-6-1998, total land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land in village Sidhra Majeen was transferred to JDA under administrative control of HUDA out of which possession of 517 kanal 10 marlas was handed over the JDA on 6-6-2002 and the remaining 106 kanal was still under physical possession of Forest Department with a nursery raised thereon. 200 kanals out of land measuring 517 kanal 10 marlas was proposed to be allotted in favour of Batra Hospital but possession had not been delivered to Batra Hospital. 100 kanals of land out of land measuring 517 kanal 10 marlas was proposed to be allotted in favour of Ravish Trehan for establishment of Dental College but the proposal was not approved by Board of Directors of JDA. The land was lying vacant on spot and had not been delivered to Revish Trehan. 10. Heard and considered. 11. 100 kanals of land out of land measuring 517 kanal 10 marlas was proposed to be allotted in favour of Ravish Trehan for establishment of Dental College but the proposal was not approved by Board of Directors of JDA. The land was lying vacant on spot and had not been delivered to Revish Trehan. 10. Heard and considered. 11. The factual position emerging from the status report and the supplementary affidavits placed on record would indicate that out of land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land situated in village Sidhra, land measuring 517 kanal 10 marlas was transferred to JDA but in view of the emphatic stand taken by respondent Nos. 1 and 2, it can be said without fear of contradiction that such order remained a paper order and was never acted upon. There is no controversy in regard to the remaining 106 kanals of forest land which continues to be in physical possession of Forest Department with a nursery maintained thereon. In view of the finding that the Forest Department did not handover actual physical possession of land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land to JDA, allotment to the extent of 200 kanals in favour of Batra Hospital and 100 kanals in favour of Ravish Trehan for establishment of Dental College out of such forest land cannot be countenanced. The controversy, however, is still not set at rest as a very vital issue in regard to valid transfer of land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land in favour of JDA is questioned by the petitioner in PIL who has filed a supplementary affidavit stating therein that after going through the record produced by respondent No. 3, it appears that only 3 out of 12 members had attended the Advisory Committee meeting held on 10-3-1997 constituted under Rule 3 of Jammu and Kashmir Forest (Conservation and Afforestation) Rules 2000. This position has not been rebutted by the respondents and the petitioner in OWP No. 935/2004. 12. From perusal of record, it emerges that only FC planning, Additional Chief Secretary Forest and Principal Chief Conservator of Forests had attended the 12th Meeting of Advisory Committee held on 20-3-1997 whereas quorum for the meeting in terms of Rule (5) of the aforesaid Rules had to be six. 12. From perusal of record, it emerges that only FC planning, Additional Chief Secretary Forest and Principal Chief Conservator of Forests had attended the 12th Meeting of Advisory Committee held on 20-3-1997 whereas quorum for the meeting in terms of Rule (5) of the aforesaid Rules had to be six. It is manifestly clear that the decision taken in regard to transfer of land measuring 517 kanal 10 marlas out of land measuring 623 kanal and 10 marlas of forest land in favour of JDA lacked the requisite quorum and such transfer of land in favour of JDA cannot be termed to be based on a valid decision taken by the Competent Authority. The Advisory Committee Constituted under the aforesaid Rules being woefully short of the requisite quorum, the decision regarding transfer of land in favour of JDA is rendered non est and void ab initio. Exercise of power by the Committee lacking in quorum is a fraud on the statute and not binding on the Government Officers involved in taking such a decision are liable to be taken to task and made accountable for taking such a sensitive decision, that too in regard to the Forest Land, transfer whereof for non-forestry purpose in impermissible. Otherwise also, it is fraught with serious consequences to ecology and environment besides resulting in irreversible damage to the eco-system, health of the local populace and flora and fauna. In view of the specific stand taken by respondent Nos. 1 and 2, we have no doubt in our minds that the stand taken by respondents 3 and 4 is in collusion with the intended beneficiaries which appears to be emanating from mala fides. This would be a subject area for probe by the Competent Authority which is expected to step in and stem the rot. 13. In view of the foregoing, the instant PIL is disposed of by quashing the decision taken by the Advisory Committee held on 10-3-1997 as also Government Order No. 242/FST of 1998 dated 10-6-1998 in regard to transfer of land measuring 623 kanals and 10 marlas of forest land in village Sidhra, Tehsil Jammu in favour of JDA OWP No. 935/2004 is disposed of with direction to respondent No. 5 to refund the amount of Rs. 5.00 lacs deposited by petitioner-Jammu Dental Charitable Trust with interest calculated at the rate of 6% from the date of deposit unless the same has been refunded/withdrawn by the aforesaid petitioner. The contempt petition is closed. Disposed of. Disposed off