Madras High Court
The District Forest Officer vs K.Meera Reddy on 22 July, 2021
Author: R.N.Manjula
Bench: M.M.Sundresh, R.N.Manjula
W.A.No.445 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
AND
THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.A.No.445 of 2021
and
C.M.P.No.1752 of 2021
The District Forest Officer,
Chengalpet Division,
Kancheepuram District. .... Appellant/5th Respondent
Vs.
1.K.Meera Reddy .... Respondent/Petitioner
2.The Secretary to Government,
Housing and Urban Development Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600009.
3.The Member Secretary,
Mamallapuram Local Planning Authority,
Marketing Complex,
Mamallapuram – 603104.
4.The Commissioner,
Urban Development Department,
807, Anna Salai, Chennai.
5.The Executive Officer,
Tiruporur Panchayat,
Tiruporur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/10
W.A.No.445 of 2021
6.M/s. StepStone Promoters Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director
K.Mothish Kumar
No.1/1, Sakthi Nagar, 2nd Street,
Choolaimedu, Chennai – 600094. .... Respondents
[R6 impleaded on record vide Court Order dated 15.04.2021 made in
CMP.No.4993 of 2021 in WA.445 of 2021]
Prayer :- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying
to set aside the Order passed in W.P.No.40950 of 2016 dated 08.10.2018s.
Prayer in W.P.No.40950 of 2016 :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus calling for the records relating to the 5th respondent with
reference to his NOC issued in their letter No.C.No.5214/15D dt.
26.08.2016 and quash the condition No.4 alone and further directing the
respondents 1 to 4 to receive the application for reclassification given on
03.07.2013 by the petitioner which was returned on 11.11.2013 by the 2 nd
respondent for want of NOC from the 5th respondent and to reclassify the
petitioner's land in Survey No.253/2D2 and 253/3B2 measuring an extent
of 0.60.5 hectares in Kanakappattu Panchayat, Thiruporur Taluk.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Prabhu
Additional Government Pleader (Forest)
For Respondents : Mr.S.Sundaresan [R1]
Mr.John J.Raja Singh
Government Counsel [R2 to R5]
Mr.S.Kamala Kannan [R6]
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
2/10
W.A.No.445 of 2021
JUDGEMENT
R.N.MANJULA, J.
This Writ Appeal has been filed against the Order of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No.40950 of 2016, wherein, the writ petition was filed to call for the records relating to the 5th respondent with reference to his NOC issued in his letter No.C.No.5214/15D dated 26.08.2016 and quash the condition No.4 alone and further directing the respondents 1 to 4 to receive the application for reclassification and to reclassify the petitioner's land in Survey No.253/2D2 and 253/3B2 measuring an extent of 0.60.5 hectares in Kanakappattu Panchayat, Thiruporur Taluk, was allowed as prayed for.
2. The short facts which led to the filing of the Writ Appeal is as under:-
An agricultural land measuring 0.60.5 hectares in S.Nos.253/2D2 and 253/3B2 in Kanakappattu Panchayat, Thiruporur Taluk, Chengalpet Division, Kancheepuram District, was purchased by the first respondent/writ petitioner in the year 2013. It is situated adjacent to Illalur https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 3/10 W.A.No.445 of 2021 Reserve Forest of Thiruporur range. Since the first respondent wanted to convert it into house sites, he filed an application to reclassify it as house sites. For which, the 2nd respondent asked the first respondent to furnish No Objection Certificate from the Tahsildar, Thiruporur. The first respondent obtained No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the 4th respondent. However, he was once again asked to produce an another NOC from the Appellant/5th respondent, Forest Department. The Appellant issued NOC with several conditions and out of which, the 4th condition requires that there should be sufficient open space kept vacant between the first respondent’s land and the reserved forest boundary. The said condition was imposed as per the Board Standing Orders which stipulates that no activities should be allowed upto 2 chain distance from the Reserve Forest Boundary. Despite the neighboring land owners of the first respondent have got their lands classified as house sites without much hurdles, the first respondent was allowed to fulfill the above condition. Hence, the first respondent has filed the writ petition to call for the records of the impugned Order and to quash the same and to issue directions to consider his application for reclassifying his lands as house sites. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 4/10 W.A.No.445 of 2021
3. After hearing the rival submissions, the learned single Judge has granted the relief as prayed for by the first respondent/writ petitioner. Aggrieved over that, the Appellant/5th respondent has filed this present Writ Appeal.
4. The submissions made by both sides learned counsels heard.
5. The learned counsel for the Appellant/5th respondent has submitted that the condition No.4 was issued as per Clause 38(iii) of Standing Order of the Board of Revenue for the purpose of protecting the environment and to prevent developmental activities occurring in the immediate vicinity of the Reserved Forest. Fundamental Duty is bestowed on the 5th respondent as per the Article 51(A)(g) of the Constitution of India to protect and improve the environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife. As per Clause 38(iii) of the Board Standing Orders, no activities upto the boundaries of the Reserved Forest should be permitted and there should be an unassigned vacant space of 41.2 metres by 60.4 metres of land should be left between the reserved forest and the land sought to be assigned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 5/10 W.A.No.445 of 2021
6. The learned counsel for the first respondent/writ petitioner has submitted that just because the lands of the first respondent was situated adjacent to the reserved forest, the Local Planning Authority required him to obtain NOC from the Forest Department. But there is no statutory provision to restrict the activities within the lands of the first respondent.
7. Since the entire issue revolves around Clause 38(iii) of the Revenue Board Standing Orders, it is extracted as below for the convenient appreciation:
“(iii) Land in the vicinity of reserved forests : Assignment should not made from land which adjoins a reserved forest or an unreserved block of 2.59 kilo metre or more until the Collector has consulted the District Forest Officer considered any objection, he may have to its assignment. Assignment of land should not be made right upto the boundary of reserved forests, but a belt of vacant land 40.2 metres by 60.4 meres wide should be left unassigned between the reserve boundary and the land to be assigned.”
8. Admittedly, the land in question was not owned by the first respondent/writ petitioner by virtue of any Government Assignment in his favour. The first respondent/writ petitioner has purchased the said land by https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 6/10 W.A.No.445 of 2021 virtue of a registered sale deed in the year 2013 and thus he has acquired the ownership by purchase. The learned single Judge has rightly observed the above said facts while distinguishing the applicability of Clause 38(iii) of the Revenue Board Standing Orders for the facts in hand. Obviously, the first respondent/writ petitioner has been in possession and occupation of the subject land and his endeavor is to get his lands reclassified as house sites. It is to be noted that similar such reclassification has been accommodated to the neighboring land owners of the first respondent.
9. An Advocate Commissioner who was appointed to make a local inspection and submit a report has stated in his report that developments have already taken place near the Illalur Reserve Forest area and some of the connecting roads like Thiruporur – Kattur Road and Kelambakkam – Vandalur Road are running nearby. In fact, Thiruporur – Kattur Road lies in between the petitioner's land and the Reserved Forest area.
10. The Commissioner has further stated that the first respondent’s land is located at a distance of about 1.5 kms from the OMR. A Panchayat Road of 40 ft width runs abutting western side of the first respondent’s https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 7/10 W.A.No.445 of 2021 land. The physical features surrounding the first respondent’s land would show that it is situated a little far away from the forest area. Even at the south-east edge of the Illalur Reserve Forest, there are Government Schools for boys and girls and some private developments seen. So in all probabilities, the location of the first respondent’s land seems to be more interior and less riskier than the other lands, which were developed around the forest area. Further, the extent of the land sought to be reclassified by the first respondent is also comparatively less than the big real estate projects that have been developed near the main roads surrounding the forest region.
11. In fact, the Appellant himself has observed that the subject property is not adjacent to any Wildlife Sanctuary, National Park or Biosphere Reserve. Under such circumstances, the first respondent cannot be discriminated by imposing conditions which were not imposed on some of the lands which lie close to the forest area and as observed by the Commissioner.
12. Since the first respondent/writ petitioner had acquired the subject https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 8/10 W.A.No.445 of 2021 property by virtue of purchase and not by any Government Assignment and its location and other physical features are not adverse to the environmental safety or ecological balance, the learned single Judge has preferred to consider the prayer of the first respondent favorably and allowed the Writ Petition. As the decision so rendered by the learned single Judge does not suffer from any factual or legal infirmity, we do not find any reason for interference.
In the result, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.
(M.M.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.)
22.07.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Sni
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and R.N.MANJULA, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
9/10
W.A.No.445 of 2021
Sni
To
1.The District Forest Officer,
Chengalpet Division, Kancheepuram District.
2.The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600009.
3.The Member Secretary, Mamallapuram Local Planning Authority, Marketing Complex, Mamallapuram – 603104.
4.The Commissioner, Urban Development Department, 807, Anna Salai, Chennai.
5.The Executive Officer, Tiruporur Panchayat, Tiruporur.
6.Managing Director K.Mothish Kumar, M/s. StepStone Promoters Pvt. Ltd., No.1/1, Sakthi Nagar, 2nd Street, Choolaimedu, Chennai – 600094.
W.A.No.445 of 2021
22.07.2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 10/10