Orissa High Court
WP(C)/24074/2020 on 28 September, 2020
W.P.(C) No. 24074 of 2020
02. 28.09.2020 Heard Mr. K.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Muduli, learned Addl. Government Advocate on behalf of State-opposite parties by Video Conferencing mode.
2. This writ petition has been filed by M/s. J.S. Construction Pvt. Ltd. seeking issuance of a direction to opposite party No.2-Principal Secretary to the Government of Odisha in the Forest and Environment Department, Bhubaneswar to dispose of the representation of the petitioner filed under Annexure-2 to this writ petition by giving an opportunity of hearing and to grant permission to the petitioner for operation of Ghuma Ghasua Black Stone Quarry in Baniabandha Reserved Forest under Athagarh Forest Division, Cuttack over the approved forest area of 4.9 Hectare.
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner- company is the lease holder of aforesaid stone quarry and after compliance of all terms and conditions imposed in stage-II clearance order dated 13.07.2009, the lease deed has been executed with the DFO, Athgarh Division on 28.03.2014. Thereafter, the DFO, Athagarh vide letter dated 27.05.2014 permitted the petitioner/User Agency to carry on non-forest activities like site clearance, road repairing and labour camp -2- shed etc. with a restriction that on receipt of clearance from National Board of Wildlife, the quarry operation over an area of 4.9 Hectare may be allowed. It is stated by the petitioner that the said approved quarry area and the forest area of 0.802 hectare proposed for road and parking are not coming within the Eco-sensitive zone. As per the terms and conditions of the State-I and Stage-II clearance order, the petitioner Company has already deposited a sum of Rs. 33,44,925/- in addition to other deposits amount to Rs. 1, 32,048/- as per the direction of the DFO, Athagarh. However, without any basis the said authority is insisting the petitioner to obtain NBWL Clearance even though the project site is falling outside the Eco-sensitive zone/Wild Life Sanctuary/National Park/Tiger Reserve etc.
4. Mr. K.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that ventilating its entire grievances, the petitioner- company has submitted a detailed representation under Annexure-2 to the writ petition before the opposite party No.2, which is pending consideration. Therefore, it is prayed that a direction be issued to the said authority to consider the representation of the petitioner.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstance of the case and considering the limited nature of prayer made by the petitioner, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this writ -3- petition by directing the opposite party No.2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-2, in accordance with law, by a speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case of the petitioner. The opposite party No.2 shall be free to consider the representation of the petitioner on its own merit.
With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
As pandemic COVID-19 period is continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court's website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed, vide Court's Notice No. 4587, dated 25.03.2020.
(Mohammad Rafiq) Chief Justice (Dr. B.R. Sarangi) Judge AD