ORDER : I.A. Nos. 52897-98 of 2021 and I.A. No. 61361 of 2021 1. The application for impleadment is allowed. 2. By way of these applications, the applicant(s) seek following prayer: (b) direct the Competent Authority/respondents appointed under the “the Jammu and Kashmir Non-Forest Land Khair Trees ‘Acacia Catechu’ (Management Plan) Rules, 2016-SRO-111 of 2016 to grant permission for felling of trees-in accordance with law. 3. It is the grievance of the applicant that though the applicant(s) had applied for permission to fell the Khair trees and their applications were duly recommended by the revenue authorities, there was delay in forwarding the same to the District Forest Officer (in short “DFO”), on account of such delay, the DFO has not granted them permission. 4. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, learned counsel for the State submits that vide Management Plan dated 26.04.2016 and Rules notified vide notification/SRO-111 dated 31.03.2016, which were issued in pursuance to the order passed by this Court dated 16.09.2013, a specific time-frame was fixed during which the applications were to be made. He submits that admittedly the applications made by the applicant(s) were not made within the prescribed time. 5. He, however, fairly concedes that since the time-frame was being framed for the first time, there was no proper publication of the said guidelines. 6. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the matter, we find that it will be appropriate that the applications be considered afresh. 7. We, therefore, direct the revenue authorities to make a fresh survey and submit their report to the DFO within a period of four weeks from today. 8. On such a report being submitted, the DFO, DRC Division shall take a decision with regard to grant of permission to the applicant(s) for felling of Khair trees. 9. We clarify that we are not observing anything on the merits of the matter and the concerned authority would consider the application(s) made by each applicant, on their own merits. 10. The applications are disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 87648 of 2020 alongwith CEC Report No. 15/2023 in I.A. No. 3840/14 (disposed of) and I.A. Nos. 132905 of 2022 in I.A. No. 2370 of 2007 (disposed of) As prayed, list these applications on 10.05.2023. I.A. Nos. 31095, 31104 and 31118 of 2019 with I.A. Nos. 59646 of 2021, 43308 of 2022 In view of letter circulated by Mr. 132905 of 2022 in I.A. No. 2370 of 2007 (disposed of) As prayed, list these applications on 10.05.2023. I.A. Nos. 31095, 31104 and 31118 of 2019 with I.A. Nos. 59646 of 2021, 43308 of 2022 In view of letter circulated by Mr. Shamshad, learned counsel for the applicant(s) seeking adjournment for filing affidavit, list this matter after four weeks. I.A. Nos. 196062 and 174896 of 2019 alongwith CEC Report No. 11/2023 1. Vide order dated 24.02.2023, we have considered I.A. No.196062 & 174896/2019 filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir 2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we have passed the following order: “I.A. NO.196062 & 174896/2019 (ITEM NO.3) Application for impleadment (I.A. NO.196062) is allowed. I.A. No.174896/2019 is filed with the following prayer:- “Allow the present Application and permit the Applicant to construct a Convention Centre at Patnitop after demolishing the existing dilapidated Club Building of Jammu and Kashmir Tourism Development Corporation (JKTDC).” The application is allowed, subject to obtaining clearances from the Statutory Authorities concerned.” 3. After the order was passed, the Central Empowered Committee [in short “CEC”] has submitted its report on the present matter on 13.03.2023. 4. In the report, the CEC has stated that it is not in favour of permitting construction of Convention Centre at the proposed site. It has also proposed that Patnitop Development Authority may look for an alternative site outside forest area. 5. Mr. A.D.N. Rao, learned Amicus Curiae submits that the proposed construction would lead to destruction of the entire Deodar Forest. 6. While allowing the application vide our order dated 24.02.2023, we had put a rider that permission granted is subject to all statutory clearances. 7. Much water has flown since the very first order dated 12.12.1996 was passed by this Court in this batch of matters. Various statutes have been enacted since then, like the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, Forest Conservation Rules, 2022 Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016, and Compensatory Afforestation Fund Rules, 2018, which take care of protecting the environmental concerns. The relevant authorities are required to take into consideration the paramount interest of protecting the forest. Permission for felling trees, if required, and if is unavoidable, has to be granted only on stringent condition(s). 8. Apart from that, Mr. The relevant authorities are required to take into consideration the paramount interest of protecting the forest. Permission for felling trees, if required, and if is unavoidable, has to be granted only on stringent condition(s). 8. Apart from that, Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General makes a specific statement that the construction is proposed at the existing site and not a single tree is being felled for the proposed construction. 9. In that view of the matter, we do not find it necessary to consider the report of the CEC dated 13.03.2023. 10. In any case, we are of the view that once an order is passed by this Court, it is not appropriate for a Committee which was constituted under the very orders of this Court to give a report which in effect, questions the correctness or otherwise, of the orders passed by this Court. 11. A Committee which is constituted under the orders of the Court cannot consider itself to be an appellate authority in regard to the orders passed by this Court. 12. We are further informed by the learned Solicitor General that at times, the members of the CEC are not ad idem on all the issues, which are ultimately reported to this Court. 13. We, therefore, direct that hereinafter, wherever there is a separate or dissenting opinion of any of the members of the CEC, such opinion shall also be placed before the Court alongwith the report. 14. It is further informed that some of the members of the Committee have crossed the age of 75 years and some of the members are also living abroad. 15. No doubt, the Committee has rendered yeomen services to the cause of environment. However, we are of the view that for effective functioning of the CEC, it is appropriate that some experts in the relevant fields who are relatively younger to the present incumbents, can contribute in a more energetic and efficient manner. It will therefore be appropriate that some of the old members, who have attained an advanced age or are not available in India all the time, are replaced by younger members. 16. We, therefore, request the learned Solicitor General and both the learned Amicus Curiae to give a list of persons, who have expertise in environmental and ecological fields. The same shall be done within three weeks from today. 17. 16. We, therefore, request the learned Solicitor General and both the learned Amicus Curiae to give a list of persons, who have expertise in environmental and ecological fields. The same shall be done within three weeks from today. 17. List these applications on 19.04.2023 for direction. I.A. Nos. 43616, 43618 and 43621 of 2020 As prayed, list these applications after four weeks. I.A. Nos. 19010,75982, 86706, 90640, 122128 and 122130, 129260, 129264, 129279, 150901 and 150915 of 2019 As prayed, list thee applications on 19.04.2023. I.A. Nos. 1408, 1457 and 1462 of 2005, 1787, 1863-1864 of 2007 and 3453 of 2012 As prayed, list these applications after four weeks. I.A. Nos. 45021 and 45024 of 2023 List these applications on 19.04.2023. I.A. Nos. 48335, 49750 and 55117, 49742 of 2023 1. The application for impleadment is allowed. 2. By way of this application, the applicant in I.A. No. 49750 of 2023 seeks following prayer: “to remove 10 spontaneous trees in the Gummanur Reserve Forest in Dharmapuri from chainage Km: 23+350 & km: 60+100 for laning of Thorapalli Agraharam to Jittandahalli Section of NH-844;” AND By way of this application, the applicant in I.A. No. 49742 of 2023 seeks following prayer: “to remove 901 trees in Sanamavu, Reserve Forest in Krishnagiri District in Thorapalli Agaraharam to Jittandahalli Section of NH-844 from chainage Km: 23+350 to km: 60+100; 3. These applications have been filed for permission to remove the trees for expansion of the existing national highways. 4. Mr. K. Parmeshwar, Amicus Curiae submitted that in so far as I.A. Nos. 49750 and 49742 of 2023 are concerned, felling the trees might adversely affect the existing elephant corridor. 5. Mr. Mahender Vyas, learned counsel, fairly states in the proposal itself, there is provision for mitigation measures, so as to protect the interest of the elephant habitat. 6. In that view of the matter, these applications are allowed, subject to all statutory clearances and strict adherence to the mitigation measures as proposed. I.A. Nos. 60356 and 60346 of 2023 and C.A. No. 9206 of 2022 Learned counsel appearing for the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee (in short “SEAC”) as well as learned counsel appearing for the State of Rajasthan seeks three weeks’ time to file reply affidavit. Time is granted as requested. List these application(s)/matter(s) after four weeks. I.A. Nos. 60356 and 60346 of 2023 and C.A. No. 9206 of 2022 Learned counsel appearing for the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee (in short “SEAC”) as well as learned counsel appearing for the State of Rajasthan seeks three weeks’ time to file reply affidavit. Time is granted as requested. List these application(s)/matter(s) after four weeks. The applicant(s)/petitioner(s) is always at liberty to make the representation, which will be considered in accordance with law.