9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by opposite party no. 7 rejecting the proposal for grant of environment clearance in respect of Laigura Stone Quarry as per letter no. 4207 dated 16.10.2020. 2. The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner is the owner of the land appertaining to plot no. 692/3087, khata no. 43, measuring Ac. 0.38 decimal, Kissam Goda-2 of Village-Gochhara in the district of Sambalpur. Lokanath Pradhan, Jenamani Pradhan and Purna Chandra Pradhan of the same village are the owners of the plots adjacent to the plot of the petitioner. On 27.06.2016, petitioner executed lease agreements with Lokanath Pradhan and Arjun Pradhan, who are sons of late Jenamani Pradhan, and also Purna Chandra Pradhan in respect of their plots for a period of twenty-five years. After execution of the said agreements, as the kisam of the land is Goda-2 and stones are available on the surface of the land, including the land of the petitioner, the petitioner had applied in Form-J under the provisions of Rule 26(2) of the Odisha Minor Mineral Concessions (Amendment) Rules, 2014 to opposite party no. 5-Tahasildar, Kuchinda to grant lease of the stone quarry for a period of five years over Ac. 4.81 dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10.07.2019, 24.09.2019 and 10.12.2019 three joint verifications were conducted by the Revenue and Forest authorities, in presence of the petitioner and other villagers, on the status of the land where Laigura Stone Quarry is situated. 2.2. The Divisional Forest Officer, Bamara, 29.01.2020, wrote a letter to the Collector, Sambalpur to the following effect:- "In response to your office letter No. Cited above, a joint verification by Revenue and Forest Officials in presence of the Petitioner and the villagers was taken up on 10.12.2019 at Mouza: Laigura. It is to mention here that earlier also two nos. of joint verification have been carried out on the status of the land on dt. 10.07.2019 and on dt. 24.09.2019. The copied of all these JV are enclosed here with. From all these JVs it came out that in the year 2007 lease for as area of Ac. 2.41 dec. was given to Sri Raj Kishore Deo of village: Gochhara for lifting of stone. The details of leased land particular are Sl. No. Name of Village Name of Rayat Khata No. Plot No. Area 1. Gochhara Rajkoishore Deo S/oHarish Ch. Deo 43 693/3058 692/3087 Ac. 0.21 Ac. 0.38 2. Laigura Lokanath Pradhan 121/67 692/3237 Ac 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on list of plots that were proposed to be included for constitution of the "Langposh-Baliturei PRF(A)" from the Revenue Department Record Room. The information from the District Magistrate and Collector, Sambalpur has not yet received. Therefore after receipt of the above clarifications from the Collector, Sambalpur regarding the status of the land (Forest or Non-Forest) of Plot No. 692, 692/3237, 692/3087, Khata No. 121/70, 121/69, 121/67, 43 categorical reply can be submitted. Since at present it is a PRF land as per records of Bamara Wildlife Division, the above plot nos. are not included in the DLC report. " On receipt of the aforesaid letter from the Divisional Forest Officer, Bamara, the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), on 26.11.2020, wrote a letter to the Tahasildar, Kuchinda stating inter-alia that as the Laigura Stone Quarry is situated inside the notified Protected Reserve Forest (PRF) area, as intimated by the DFO, Bamara Wildlife Division vide letter no. 4207 dated 16.10.2020, the environment clearance sought by the petitioner is rejected. Hence this writ petition. 3. Mr. Asok Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. S. Mohanty, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide the "Langposh- Baliturei PRF(A)" as per records of the forest officials. He, therefore, contended that the order impugned refusing to grant environmental clearance in favour of the petitioner is justified. It is further contended that opposite party no. 6, vide letter dated 16.10.2020, reported to the Member Secretary, SEIAA, Odisha that the District Magistrate and Collector, Sambalpur was requested vide memo no. 269 dated 29.01.2020 to refer to the Forest Settlement Officer's report on list of plots that were proposed to be included for constitution of the Langposh-Baliturei PRF (A) from the Revenue Department Record Room, and that information from the District Magistrate and Collector, Sambalpur has not yet received, and that after clarification from the District Magistrate and Collector, Sambalpur regarding status of plot nos. 692, 692/3236, 692/3237, 692/3087, khata no. 121/70, 121/69, 121/67, 43, categorical reply can be submitted. It is further contended that the authority is well justified in refusing to grant environmental clearance in favour of the petitioner to operate the quarry in question. 5. This Court heard Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel appearing al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of the Act and notification u/s. 21 of Orissa Forest Act, 1972 in respect of reservation of Langposh-Baliturei 'A' forest Block under Bamra Forest Division are not traceable. Hoverer, we have requested to Govt. in Forest & Environment Department, Odisha to provide a copy of the notification, if issued and available at their end." 4. In view of such position, the direction given in the impugned order in Annexure-12 dated 26.11.2020 is contrary to the documents which has been referred to above, thereby it is contended that the authorities have mechanically passed the impugned order and rejected the claim of the petitioner and the area has not been declared as reserved forest pursuant to Rule 21 of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972. 5. Mr. P.P. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate is directed the place all such documents which has been annexed in the Memo, by way of an affidavit duly sworn in by the competent authority, for just adjudication of the case. 6. The affidavit shall be filed within a week. 7. Call this matter after two weeks." 8. In obedience to the above order, an additional affidavit was filed by Jitendra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10, communicated a letter intimating therein "that after all these efforts, it could not cleared up whether the land in question is a Revenue Land or Forest Land because both the Department claim the right over it as per the official records available with them. Therefore, in such a situation, it is suggested to refer to the Forest Settlement Officer's report (who was appointed at that time for the purpose) on list of plots that were included for constitution of the "Langposh-Balitura PRF(A)" from the Revenue Departments' Record Room and further direction from you office be issued for addressing the complain petition. 5. That on 09.9.2021, the Collector, Sambalpur, wrote a letter to the Addl. Government Advocate, Office of the Advocate General, Odisha, inter-alia stating "I am to intimate that the relevant available case records have been submitted to your good office vide this office letter mentioned supra. As per available files and records in this office, the enquiry report by the Forest Settlement Officer pursuant to section 7 of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972, relevant documents showing the exercise of power by FSO under Section 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apter." xxxx 6. Proclamation by Forest Settlement Officer- When a notification has been issued under Section 4 the Forest Settlement Officer, in the prescribed manner, publish in Oriya in every town and village in the neighbourhood of the land comprised therein, a proclamation- (a) specifying, as nearly as possible, the situation and limits of the proposed forest; (b) explaining the consequences which, as hereinafter provided will ensue on the reservation of such forest; and (c) fixing a period of not less than three months from the date of such proclamation, and requiring every person claiming any right mentioned in Section 4 or Section 5 within such period either to, present to the Forest Settlement Officer a written notice specifying or to appear before him and state the nature, of such right and the amount and particulars of the compensation, if any, claimed in respect thereof." 12. After proclamation by the Forest Settlement Officer under Section-6, Section 7 speaks about the enquiry by the Forest Settlement Officer whereas Section-8 deals with power of Forest Settlement Officer and Section-9 deals with extinction of rights. Section-21 states about notification decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C 3558, Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Essar Power Ltd., AIR 2008 SC 1921, Ram Deen Maurya v. State of U.P., (2009) 6 SCC 735. 15. In Subash Chandra Nayak v. Union of India, 2016 (I) OLR 922, similar question had come up for consideration before this Court and this Court in paragraph-8 observed as follows: "...the statute prescribed a thing to be done in a particular manner, the same has to adhered to in the same manner or not at all. The origin of the Rule is traceable to the decision in Taylor v. Tailor, (1875) LR I Ch D 426, which was subsequently followed by Lord Roche in Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor, AIR 1936 PC 253(2). But the said principle has been well recognized and holds the field till today in Babu Verghese v. Bar Council of Kerala (1999) 3 SCC 422, and Zuari Cement Limited v. Regional Director, Employees' State insurance Corporation, Hyderabad and others, (2015) 7 SCC 690 and the said principles has been referred to by this Court in Manguli Behera v. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) No. 21999 of 2014 disposed of on 10.03.2016)". Similar view has also been taken by this Court in Rudra Prasad Sarangi v. State of Orissa and others, 2021 (I) OLR 844 and Bamadev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
