PREM SAGAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of LPA No. 197 of 2009 and CWP No. 4399 of 2010 as the issue involved in both the cases is similar. However, the facts are being referred from LPA No. 197 of 2009.

(2.) LPA No. 197 of 2009 has been filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 13.2.2009 rendered by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 18596 of 2008, dismissing the writ petition. In the writ petition relatable to the aforementioned appeal the petitioner -appellant has challenged orders dated 11.4.2008 and 15.10.2008 whereby the consent/No Objection Certificate earlier granted to him for installation of a Rice Mill was withdrawn. The principal ground of withdrawal was that the site where the rice mill was to be installed, was merely 7.5 meters away from the area of the notified Bir Bhadson, Wild Life Sanctuary. Learned Single Judge dismissed the petition holding that Bir Bhadson is a notified Wild Life Sanctuary and no industrial activities could be permitted within the prohibited sitting parameters even if there is negligence on the part of the State. Learned Single Judge also brought forward the environmental issues and called for atmospheric balance and due protection of such Wild Life Sanctuary. In the concluding para of the order dated 13.2.2009, the following observations have been made: -

(3.) ON 22.7.2009, it was pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner -appellant before the Letters Patent Bench that the ground reality is that there is no Wild Life Sanctuary available in the area, which is highlighted by the communication dated 20.3.2008 (R -1) sent by the Divisional Forest Officer, Patiala to the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala. The communication shows that the Wild Life Sanctuary under Bir Bhadson, Patiala is unfenced. Similar is the position with regard to all other Sanctuaries. It does not require much imagination to conclude that there cannot be any Wild Life Sanctuary without fencing.