M R S SRINIVAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Public Interest Litigation. The petitioner seeks a declaration from the Court that the action of Respondent Nos.2 and 3 in permitting the user of forest land contrary to the provisions of Forest (Conservation Act), 1980 (for short 'the Act') and G.O.Ms.No.224 dated 11-11-93, issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh as illegal and void.

(2.) The case of the petitioner in short is that under Section 2 of the Act, no portion of land can be used for any non-forest purpose, such as cultivation of tea, coffee, spices, rubber, oil bearing plants, horticultural crops or medicinal plants. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.224 dated 11-11-93 providing for the constitution of Vana Samrakshana Samithi (for short 'the VSS') for bringing about the involvement of the people to promote conservation and development of forests. The G.O. contemplated constitution of the VSS comprising two members of every household in the village/hamlet/cluster of villages, and that one out of which should be a woman. Elections are to be conducted by the concerned Forest Range Officer by convening General Body meeting of the VSS. A managing committee is to be constituted as envisaged in Clause 'B' of Annexure I to G.O.Ms.No.224. Clause 'C' deals with the duties and responsibilities of the VSS and Clause 'D' lays down the duties and responsibilities of the managing committee. Clause 'B' referred to the functions and responsibilities of the Forest Department, and Clause 'F' dealt with the preparation of Joint Forestry Management Plan. Clause 'G' dealt with the usufructuary rights of the VSS, and Clause 'H' referred to other regulations of the VSS. According to the petitioner, G.O.Ms. No.224 dated 11-11-93, clearly showed that joint action plan between the VSS and the Forest Department was to subserve the National Forest Policy, 1988 (for short 'the NFP'), and also the provisions of the Act. The whole scheme involved, according to the petitioner, only the people of the village vis-avis the concerned Forest Officer. The Chief Minister nor any other Minister had any role to play in arriving at the joint action plan. According to the said G.O.Ms.No.224, the concerned Forest Officers of the respective Districts of the State of Andhra Pradesh had so far formed about 500 VSS, and the process was under way for formation of such samithis in other parts of the State.

(3.) It is further the case of the petitioner that the 2nd Respondent issued directions to all the District Collectors stating that the Chief Minister had announced a scheme of Joint Forest Management (for short 'the JFM') setting out the salient features, according to which a unit of 10 landless beneficiaries comprising of six unemployed educated youth forming into a group for developing and protecting the degraded forests was to be formed and that they would get the usufructuary rights. Further, according to the petitioner, the salient features of the JFM were already contained in the said G.O.Ms.No.224, and it was not open to the Chief Minister to carve out another JFM scheme with different features altogether. Further according to the petitioner, the directions contained in the proceedings dated 25-1-96 of the 2nd respondent to the District Collectors were arbitrary, unjust and politically motivated, in view of the fact that they ran contrary to the Act and provisions of G.O.Ms.No.224 dated 11-11-93. Already the legislative intent was reflected in the enactments and it was not open to the respondents to flout the same by formulating conflicting schemes to serve their own interests. The petitioner further submits that it was only the VSS, which was entitled to participate in the JFM plan and not any specific member of the village as may be picked up by the respondents or their group of elected representatives.