Karnataka High Court
Sri Y Chakrapani vs The Union Of India on 18 July, 2023
Author: G.Narendar
Bench: G.Narendar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB
WP No. 13916 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 13916 OF 2023 (S-CAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI Y CHAKRAPANI,
S/O LATE B YELLAPPA,
Digitally AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
signed by WORKING AS
NANDINI D DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,
Location: High BENGALURU URBAN DIVISION,
Court of ARANYA BHAVAN
Karnataka
18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM,
BANGALORE - 560 003
NOW UNDER AN ORDER OF SUSPENSION
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF
PERSONNEL AND TRAINING,
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL,
PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS,
NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT,
SARDAR PATEL BHAVAN,
PARLIAMENT STREET,
SANSAD MARG,
NEW DELHI - 110 011.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB
WP No. 13916 of 2023
2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF
PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATIVE
AND REFORMS (DPAR),
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAYAKARA SHETTY H, ASG. FOR R1,
SRI. VIKRAM HUILGOL, AAG A/W
SMT. M.C.NAGASHREE, ADV. FOR R2 & R3.)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27/06/2023 PASSED IN ORIGINAL
APPLICATION No.288/2023 BY THE HON'BLE CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH (ANNEXURE-
A) IN SO FAR AS NON-GRANT OF INTERIM ORDER IS
CONCERNED AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER
AS PRAYED FOR BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE
TRIBUNAL IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 288/2023
(ANNEXURE-B) ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB
WP No. 13916 of 2023
ORDER
Heard the learned senior counsel Sri P.S. Rajgopal and the learned counsel Sri Prithveesh M.K. and the learned senior counsel & Additional Advocate General Sri Vikram A Huilgol.
2. The peculiar facts of the case are that an application for tree cutting was lodged with the Assistant Conservative of Forest on 31.12.2021. The said application was forwarded to the petitioner who claims that the necessary procedural aspects have been complied with and thereafter tree cutting permission was granted. That the trees were cut between April to June, 2022. Thereafter, application for issuance of transport permit was made and transport permit came to be issued by the petitioner on 22.06.2023. But before the logs were transported the petitioner appears to have recalled the orders. Subsequently, the Forest Department, on information has secured a vigilance report and on the basis of the said vigilance report, a show cause notice -4- NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023 came to be issued to the petitioner and the same reads as under:-
"Karnataka Forest Department No.hu ha sum/v.pete/LND/CR-09/2022-23 Office of the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Virajpete Division, Virajpete, Dated 30-12-2022 Show cause Notice.
Sub: Requesting Transit permit for transportation of Planted and raised Teak trees regarding.
Ref: 1. Range Forest Officer, Ponampete Range office letter No. Your office letter No. po.pete/CR-469, dated 15-06-2022.
2. Assistant Conservator of Forests, Thithimathi sub-division, Thithimathi Office letter No. 243/2022-23, dated 22- 06-2022.
3. Range Forest Officer, Ponampete Range office letter No.776/2022-23 Dated 28-10-2022.
***** With reference to the above subject, in the letter cited under reference No.3, it is reported that 35 teak trees have been felled, teak logs =80.039 cubic meter and 30.500 Cubic meter firewood and billets are found after felling the planted and raised teak trees in land of sy. No. 76/35 and 76/1ap1 belonging to Sri. M.N. Ramesh of Kutta Village and -5- NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023 the same to be transported. But in the letter cited under reference No. 2, it is reported that, totally 66 teak trees felled, 667 logs 329.717 cubic meter and 90.600 billets and firewood is available. But the quantity mentioned in the letter cited under reference No. 1 and the quantity mentioned in the letter cited under reference 2 is found different. Therefore your explanation is sought in the matter.
Sd/-
Deputy Conservator of Forests,
Virajpete Division,
Virajpete, 13B
To
Sir. P.P. Uthappa,
Assistant Conservator of Forests, (Retd) Thithimathi Range, Thithimathi."
3. It is alleged that 66 trees have been felled and that the same has been carried out without spot verification and without establishing the identity of the land and on other charges, the petitioner was visited with a show cause notice. On receipt of reply from the petitioner, the suspension order came to be passed.
4. On perusal of the suspension order, it is seen that an allegation, that the standing timber on -6- NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023 Government lands have been felled and that the applications of the land owner have been forged and such other serious allegations are made. The nature of allegation virtually demonstrates commission of various offences under the Indian Penal Code.
5. After looking into the seriousness of the allegation, we called for the file and we have perused the vigilance report and squad report. We are surprised to find that neither the records relating to survey of the land is available nor is any exercise carried out to identify the status of the land. Yet, we find that the order of suspension alleges cutting of standing timber on Government land.
6. The records also disclose registration of FIR by the land owner against two locals. It is alleged, that the complainant and the two accused had entered into an agreement for sale and purchase of standing timber i.e., 14 trees from survey No.76/35, measuring 10 acres, 76/1 -7- NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023 AP, measuring 11.20 acres and it discloses the trade of the accused as timber merchants. The complaint further discloses that on account of work pressure the complainant did not observe as to the number of trees specified in the agreement. It is further alleged that the said duo have forged the irrevocable GPA and affidavit and that the duo, with an intention of cheating the complainant have wrongly sought permission to cut and remove 66 standing trees. That the complainant came to know about the application to cut 66 trees on the date of the complaint i.e., 04.02.2023.
7. We have gone into the contents of the FIR for the limited purpose to prima-facie assess the correctness of the allegations in the suspension order.
8. The contents of the complaint prima-facie contradict the grounds of suspension. On the one hand, it is complained that the trees have been cut from the private lands and survey numbers have also been -8- NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023 mentioned. Whereas, in the order of suspension, it is stated that the trees have cut from the Government lands. The vigilance report alleges fabrication and forgery of GPA and application by the petitioner. The same stands contradicted by the contents of the FIR wherein, the agreement of sale of standing timber and the persons responsible for doctoring the GPA are said to be the timber traders. Even the number of trees that were originally agreed upon to be sold as mentioned in the FIR contradicts the version of the department, that only permission for 6 trees had been sought. The complaint states that under the agreement 14 trees were sold and were permitted to be cut. The file placed on record by the department contains the copies of the agreement, GPA and the affidavit. Yet, we find that the department adopting a stand that is diametrically opposed to the contents of the documents found in the records.
9. Be that as it may, these various aspects of the allegation require to be ascertained after a detailed -9- NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023 enquiry or investigation and we do not wish to enter upon and adjudicate on the merits of the same.
10. As noted supra, the contents of the documents prima-facie contradicts the grounds enumerated in the order of suspension. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that the order of suspension does not inspire confidence in this Court. It is also not disputed that the petitioner is far removed from the alleged place of mischief and is presently posted at Aranya Bhavan Head Office, Bengaluru.
11. In view of our above discussion, we deem it appropriate to stay the operation of the order of suspension dated 21.06.2023 (Annexure-A14) and the order of stay shall be in operation till the pendency of the application before the Tribunal.
12. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed off.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:25494-DB WP No. 13916 of 2023
13. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are for the purposes of adjudication and disposal of the writ petition and shall not be construed as a pronouncement on the merits of the claims of the respective parties. It is open for the Tribunal to consider and dispose of the application on its merits. That the third respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to resume duties.
The file containing the original records is returned to the learned Additional Government Advocate. Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13