KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Order shall also govern the disposal of Misc. Petitions Nos. 4359 of 1988, 4190 of 1989, 4484 of 1988 and 3088 of 1989, as the subject-matter of all these petitions is renewal of licences to run saw mills within certain areas in the State under the M. P. Kashtha Chiran (Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1984.

(2.) With a view to make provisions for regulating in the public interest, the establishment and operation of saw mills and saw pits and trade of sawing for the protection and conservation of forests and the environment, the Madhya Pradesh Legislature enacted the M. P. Kashtha Chiran (Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1984, (Act No. 13/84-to be referred to as the 'Act'). It came into force in the entire State of Madhya Pradesh from the appointed day, i.e., 15/12/1983. Section 3 of the Act permits the State Government to appoint licensing officer for the purposes of the Act. Such officer shall not be below the rank of a Divisional Forest Officer. Section 4 prohibits establishment of a saw mill or a saw pit, except under the authority and subject to the conditions of a licence to be granted under the Act. Even persons operating a saw mill or a saw pit on the appointed day were required to apply for such licence within 30 days and to obtain such licence. Section 5 permits the State Government to declare, by notification, for reasons to be recorded therein, any area to be a prohibited area for a period not exceeding three years. The consequences, during the period any area is declared to be a prohibited area, are:-

(3.) In all the above petitions, by different notifications, certain areas described by geographical boundaries have been declared as prohibited areas, in exercise of powers under Section 5(1) of the Act. The State of Madhya Pradesh, in its Forest Department, issued a Memo No. D-453 / 51/42/10/3/86, dated 26/12/1986, containing a prohibition to establish any saw mill, within 20 kms. of the forest range, in areas not declared as prohibited areas. It is also provided therein that licence to run saw mill shall not be renewed in respect of such mills established within 10 kms of the limits of the reserved forest. The petitioners in all the other petitions, except this petition (M. P. No. 4335 / 88) challenge the notification dated 26-12-1986 and the consequent orders, refusing to renew their licences to run such saw mills. In the present petition (M. P. No. 4335 / 88) is challenged the notification No. F-18/2/ 86/X/3, dated 23-6-1987, referred to in Annexure P-3, where by the entire Shore district, excepting the area within the Municipal limits of Sehore, Ichhawar, Ashta, Nasrullaganj, Rehti And Village Budhni, including village Shyampur and Dharmada, has been declared as prohibited area. As a result of this notification, the petitioner's application for renewal of licence to run saw mill has not been granted. The petitioner challenges this action of refusal to renew the licence. Shri R. K. Pandey also challenges the vires of S. 5 of the Act. He prays that it be struck down as it gives unguided power to the State Government to declare any area as prohibited area. The restriction imposed, besides being discriminatory is also unreasonable. It is also urged that before issuing that notification, there had been no application of mind. He also argued that the petitioner was given no hearing before issuing that notification or before refusing to renew the licence.