DEV SEBASTIAN Vs. P R KURUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This original petition is filed in public interest. According to the petitioner, first respondent Minister has violated the oath of office. It is also stated on the basis of Exts. P 1, P2 and P3 paper reports that in violation of S.2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, a No Objection Certificate was given to a sandal wood factory by the first respondent Minister. It is also stated that first respondent Minister is corrupt and, therefore, an enquiry should be conducted by the seventh respondent Chief Minister. Petitioner prays for a direction to cancel the No Objection Certificate given to the second respondent to start a sandal wood factory in total violation of S.2 of the Indian Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

(2.) Learned Advocate General on getting instructions submitted that no such No Objection Certificate was given by the first respondent or at the instance of first respondent and, therefore, the allegations in the original petition are totally false. It is also submitted that petition of this type is not maintainable as it solely depends upon paper reports and nothing else.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner cited the interim order in O. P. No. 202 of 1995 passed by the Supreme Court of India therein it was stated that in respect of non forest activities in forest area there is permission from the Central Government and S.2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is very clear about such approval from the Central Government. Various directions were given to all State Governments regarding conservation of forests and regarding constitution of an Expert Committee to identify the area of forests, forest materials etc. It is submitted by the petitioner that No Objection Certificate given by the first respondent is against the observations of the Supreme Court. It is also vehemently argued that in view of the paper reports various corrupt practices are going on. In view of the decision in State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, 1975 (4) SCC 428 : ( AIR 1975 SC 865 ) the people of this country are entitled to know the realities and, therefore, an enquiry at least should be conducted regarding these matters and, therefore, at least notice may be issued so that real facts can be known to the public.