MUSTHAFA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ petition is filed by the petitioners against an order rejecting their application for cutting and removing trees standing near their building on the Palakkad - Ponnani road (via Pattambi), which, according to them, is a danger to the public and also obstructs the view to their building. While going through the pleadings in this case, I remember the great poet and environmentalist, Smt. Sugathakumari teacher. She is known for her love towards the nature and the environment. No Malayalee will be blamed if she is called the Mother of nature. It will be beneficial to quote a few lines of her famous poem:

(2.) The sum and substance of the poem is like this:

(3.) Petitioners are absolute owners, who are in actual possession of land bearing Re-survey No.240/1 and 0.0633 at Edathara Village, Palakkad. Petitioners were granted a permit to construct a commercial building on the said land by the local authority, Parali Grama Panchayat. When the writ petition was filed, the construction of the building was almost complete. It is submitted that the petitioners' land abuts, on the north, the Palakkad to Pattambi State Highway. It is stated that huge trees are standing between the petitioners' property and the public road. The trees are planted by the Forest Department as part of afforestation. According to the petitioners, the trees stand in a manner hazardous to the petitioners' building. The petitioners approached the Public Works Department with a request to remove the trees. It is submitted that, on inspection, the Officials of the Public Works Department were convinced about the veracity of the complaints of the petitioners. According to the petitioners, unless the trees are cut, it would not be practical to carry on business activities in the petitioners' building. It is also stated that the intending tenants shy away to occupy the rooms. The trees actually have now begun to pose challenge to the very livelihood of the petitioners, is the submission. It is the case of the petitioners that hard earned money of the petitioners is used to construct the building. The trees are now causing a threat to the life and property of the petitioners. The trees are standing on the road belonging to the Public Works Department. It is submitted that the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department, on the basis of the petitioners' complaint and the inspection report, requested the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Social Forestry Division, the permission to cut and remove the trees. It is also submitted that the petitioners are ready to plant trees at their property in substitution for the trees to be cut in their complaint. Petitioners are also ready to bear the expenses of cutting and removing the trees and also to pay the value of the trees. Ext.P5 is the letter dtd. 5/3/2016 from the Assistant Engineer, Public Works - Road Sec. No.1, Palakkad to the Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works - Road Sec. No.1, Palakkad recommending the cutting of trees because the branches of the trees are hanging in a dangerous manner. Ext.P6 is the letter dtd. 9/3/2016 from the Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works - Road Sec. to the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Social Forestry Division, Olavakkod, Palakkad in which also it is stated that the branches of the trees are hanging in a dangerous condition and permission may be granted to cut and remove the trees. Exts.P7 and P8 are the replies received by the 1st petitioner under the Right to Information Act from the Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department, and the Public Information Officer and Deputy Forest Conservator. Ext.P9 is the letter dtd. 9/2/2017 issued by the Deputy Forest Conservator rejecting the applications of the petitioners. Hence, this writ petition is filed with the following prayers: