MANAGING TRUSTEE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This original petition has been preferred seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Exts. P7 and P8 notifications issued by the Government of Kerala in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986 directing the petitioner not to cut trees mentioned in the areas specified in the Schedule thereto except on the ground that the tree constitutes a danger to life or property or the tree is dead, diseased or wind fallen. Explanatory Note attached to Ext. P8 Notification reads as follows:

(2.) Detailed counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating that the area in question is a portion of Anakkaranam Malavaram in Pottassery village and supports large number of trees of spontaneous growth and it is felt that the petitioner may fell trees on restoration of the area and that would lead to wanton destruction of forest tree growth in the area resulting in the ecological imbalance and soil erosion. It is with a view to regulate the felling of trees available in the area the notification was issued for regulating the felling of trees as per Section 5 of the Act. It is also stated that Section 5 of the Act empowers the Government to restrict felling of trees with a view to preserve tree growth in private forests or in the cardamom hill reserve or in any other areas cultivated with cardamom by notification in the gazette. It is stated that the land is covered by the erstwhile M.P.P.F. Act and is a private forest within the definition of the Act and consequently Government is justified in issuing the notification under Section 5 of the Act.

(3.) Properties mentioned in the abovementioned notification was the subject-matter of O.A. No. 123 of 1977 before the Forest Tribunal, Manjeri. That was an application preferred by the petitioner herein under Section 8 of the Kerala Private Forest (Vesting & Assignment) Act, 1971 for a declaration that the properties mentioned therein is not private forest liable to be vested in the Government under the Vesting Act. Matter was elaborately considered by the Tribunal and the Tribunal held as follows: