RAJ KISHOR DEO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by means of this writ petition, seeks to quash the letter no. 4207 dtd. 16/10/2020 under Annexure-11, which was issued by opposite party no.6-Divisional Forest Officer, Bamara Wildlife Division, Sambalpur to opposite party no.7- Member Secretary, State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Bhubaneswar requesting him not to grant environment clearance in respect of Laigura Stone Quarry on the ground that the land was not demarcated, even if three joint measurements were conducted by the Revenue Department and Forest Department and the plots were proposed to be included for constitution of the Langposh-Baliturei Protected Reserve Forest (PRF); as well as letter no. 9803/SEIAA dtd. 26/11/2020 under Annexure-12 issued by opposite party no.7 rejecting the proposal for grant of environment clearance in respect of Laigura Stone Quarry as per letter no. 4207 dtd. 16/10/2020.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner is the owner of the land appertaining to plot no. 692/3087, khata no. 43, measuring Ac. 0.38 decimal, Kissam Goda-2 of Village-Gochhara in the district of Sambalpur. Lokanath Pradhan, Jenamani Pradhan and Purna Chandra Pradhan of the same village are the owners of the plots adjacent to the plot of the petitioner. On 27/6/2016, petitioner executed lease agreements with Lokanath Pradhan and Arjun Pradhan, who are sons of late Jenamani Pradhan, and also Purna Chandra Pradhan in respect of their plots for a period of twenty-five years. After execution of the said agreements, as the kisam of the land is Goda-2 and stones are available on the surface of the land, including the land of the petitioner, the petitioner had applied in Form-J under the provisions of Rule 26(2) of the Odisha Minor Mineral Concessions (Amendment) Rules, 2014 to opposite party no.5-Tahasildar, Kuchinda to grant lease of the stone quarry for a period of five years over Ac. 4.81 decimal. The said application was registered as Touzi Case No. 140 of 2016 of Kuchinda Tahasil. The other owners had submitted their no objection certificates in shape of affidavit. On 17/10/2016, the Tahasildar, Kuchinda had invited objections and no objection was received within the stipulated period. After necessary scrutiny, opposite party no.5-Tahasildar, Kuchinda recommended the application of the petitioner to opposite party no.4-Sub-Collector, Kuchinda, who duly recommended the application of the petitioner to opposite party no.3-Collector, Sambalpur. On 19/6/2017, opposite party no.3, being the competent authority, declared Laigura Stone Quarry as a new sairat. The schedule of the land described in Form-J by the petitioner was approved by the Collector, Sambapur for Laigura Stone Quarry. Pursuant to such approval, the Deputy Collector (Revenue), Sambalpur, on 20/6/2017, wrote a letter to the Tahasildar, Kuchinda to take further necessary action as per the provisions of Odisha Minor Mineral Concessions (Amendment) Rules, 2014. Accordingly, on 21/6/2017, the Tahasildar, Kuchinda wrote a letter to the petitioner to submit mining plan and environmental clearance of Laigura Stone Quarry. After receipt of the said letter, petitioner prepared mining plan of Laigura Stone Quarry, which was approved by the Deputy Director of Geology, Sambalpur. After approval of the mining plan, petitioner submitted the same before the Tahasildar, Kuchinda and requested him to forward the proposal/ application for necessary environmental clearance.

(3.) Mr. Asok Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. S. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the letter dtd. 16/10/2020 under Annexure-11 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bamara Wildlife Division is illegal, arbitrary and thus cannot sustain in the eye of law, in view of the letters dtd. 29/1/2020 and 16/10/2020 of the Divisional Forest Officer, Bamara Wildlife Division addressed to the Collector & District Magistrate, Sambalpur and Member Secretary, State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, (SEIAA), Odisha, Bhubaneswar respectively that the plots of Laigura Stone Quarry are not coming under the protected reserve forest. Therefore, the order refusing to grant environment clearance cannot sustain in the eye of law. It is further contended that save and except Sec. -4 notification, no further follow up action has taken place till today. Therefore, inclusion of disputed plots under "Langposh-Baliturei PRF(A)", as alleged, has no justification. Furthermore, the disputed plots are not included in the notification and in absence of the said plot numbers in the notification, the map cannot be relied upon, particularly when the Divisional Forest Officer, Bamara Wildlife Division in his letter dtd. 16/10/2020 stated that "after all these efforts it could not be cleared up whether the land in question is a Revenue Land or Forest Land because both the Department claim the right over it as per the official records available with them". It is further contended that the status of the land in question is 'Rayati' and, as such, the petitioner-lessee has been paying rent to the State Government. Thereby, the assertion made by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bamra Wildlife Division that the disputed plots are coming under the protected reserve forest, has no justification. Thereby, he seeks for quashing of the letter dtd. 16/10/2020 under Annexure-11 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bamra Wildlife Division and the letter dtd. 26/11/2020 under Annexure-12 issued by opposite party no.7-State Environment Impact Assessment authority (SEIAA).