National Green Tribunal
Gollapalli Bhaskar Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 4 April, 2022
Bench: K Ramakrishnan, K. Satyagopal
Item No.01:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 226 of 2021 (SZ)
(Through Video Conference)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Gollapalli Bhaskar Reddy ... Applicant(s)
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh and others.
... Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 04.04.2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): None Appeared
For Respondent(s): Ms. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R1 to R4
Ms. M. Sumathi for R5
Mr.T. Sai Krishnan for R6
Mr. Akula Kishan for Forest Department
ORDER
1. As per order dated 11.02.2022, the matter was adjourned to 11.03.2022 for appearance of 3rd respondent and completion of pleadings. 1
2. As per this order, we wanted a separate engagement for Forest Department as there is a possibility of conflict between the State Government and the Forest Department.
3. We also directed the District Collector to file a statement regarding the nature of assignment made to the original parties from whom the land has been obtained by the 6th respondent and whether there was any condition imposed and the purpose for which it was given. The District Collector was also directed to answer the allegations in the application as to whether these trees were planted in the area under the "Van Samrakshana" Scheme by utilizing the Government fund. We have directed the Principal Conservator of Forests and the District Collector to file independent statements. On 11.03.2022, it was adjourned to today by notification.
4. The 5th respondent entered appearance through Ms. M. Sumathi and Mr. Akula Kishan appeared for Forest Department. Service is complete.
5. Respondents 3 to 6 have filed their counter.
6. We have received a report submitted by the Principal Conservator of Forests, Andhra Pradesh stating that regarding the applicability of decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in W.P (C) No. 202 of 1995 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors 1 whether the subject land comes under the definition of „deemed forest‟, it 1 (1997) 2 SCC 267 2 is submitted that the criteria for definition for deemed forest/land falling dictionary meaning of forest (which are not under the administrative control of Forest Department) are yet to be finalized by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Soon after finalization of definition/criteria by the Government, the same would be applied on the subject land for examining the applicability of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 under criteria „deemed forest‟.
7. Learned Counsel appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh submitted that District Collector also filed additional counter answering the query raised by this Tribunal and the office informed that the same has been received.
8. Learned Counsel appearing for 6th respondent submitted that as far as possible they will avoid cutting of trees. At least permission for pruning can be granted, so that they can make the area available for cultivation in a fit condition. The 6th respondent is also directed to file a detailed statement to that effect and also mention the extent of land in their possession and what is the extent of land covered by the Tamarind trees and whether the proposed cultivation can be possible excluding the area covered by Tamarind trees and by intercropping among the Tamarind trees, if they do not have more extent of land, so that even pruning of trees can be avoided, for that they wanted some time. 3
9. In the meantime, we hope that without taking a decision regarding the criteria to be finalized for deemed forest by the State of Andhra Pradesh, the Forest Department will not give further permission in this regard as unless this exercise is done by them and finalized the definition of deemed forest as required under the direction of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman‟s case and any decision for cutting the old trees without above decision will be detrimental to the environment, since the ecosystem service of the trees in providing large quantity of oxygen and carbon sequestration cannot be achieved quickly through compensatory plantation.
10.Though, the applicant was not present today, we feel that an opportunity can be given to the applicant to file their rejoinder, if any, to the counter filed to satisfy the principle of natural justice.
11.Learned Counsel appearing for the Forest Department Mr. Akula Kishan submitted that he was not aware of the latest report submitted by the PCCF and will verify the same and come with the further stand of the Forest Department as to whether any further permission can be granted without finalizing the criteria of deemed forest to bring those green cover area under the grammatical meaning of forest as observed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman‟ case after ascertaining from the Forest Department for which he wanted some time.
4
12.They are directed to submit the respective statement and the applicant is also directed to file the rejoinder, if any and complete the pleading on or before 20.04.2022 and get ready with the matter on 21.04.2022.
13.Registry is directed to communicate this order to the official respondents by e-mail immediately for their information and compliance of directions.
14.For completion of pleadings and hearing, post on 21.04.2022.
..................................J.M. (Justice K. Ramakrishnan) ...............................E.M. (Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati) ........................E.M. (Dr. Vijay Kulkarni) O.A. No. 226/2021(SZ) 4th April, 2022. (AM) 5