IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION Nos.9337-9338/2015(GM-FOR) BETWEEN:
1. SRI K. L. SUDHAKARA, AGED 45 YEARS S/O LINGAPPA GOWDA KOLIGE VILLAGE, AGRAHARA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577432.
2. SRI. K.M. GURUMURTHY AGED 55 YEARS S/O MANJAPPA GOWDA R/AT KOLIGE VILLAGE & GRAMA SHEDGAR POST, MUTHUR HOBLI THIRTHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577432.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI B. V. BADRINATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED ITS FOREST SECRETARY FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT, ECOLOGY DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-01 2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST PROTECTION OFFICER, SHIVAMOGGA DIVISION, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT SHIVAMOGGA-577432 3. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SHIVAMOGGA DIVISION, SHIVAMOGGA-577432 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL FOREST PROTECTION OFFICER, SHEDGAR BRANCH MANDAGADDE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577432 5. THE TAHASILDAR THIRTHALLI SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577432 6. THE PRESIDENT AND PDO GRAMA PANCHAYAT SHEDGAR, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577432 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VASANTH V. FERNANDES, HCGP FOR R1-R5; SRI B.S. VENKATA NARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R6) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO ACCORD PERMISSION TO THE PETITIONERS TO TRANSPORT THE 'AKASHIA TREES' STACKED IN THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT SCHOOL PREMISES, AT SHEDAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MATTUR HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioners have filed the present wit petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to accord permission to the petitioners to transport the ‘Akashia trees’ stocked in the Grama Panchayat School premises at Shedgar Grama Panchayat, Mattur Hobli, Thirthahalli taluk, Shivamogga district.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that the 1st petitioner is a registered forest contractor for the year 2014-15 at Shivamogga Division. The 3rd respondent issued the Registration Certificate dated 3.4.2014 to the 1st petitioner as Forest Contractor. The 3rd respondent also issued letter of confirmation dated 3.4.2014 in this regard to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioners have entered into an agreement with the 6th respondent on 12.6.2014 to buy ‘Akashia trees’ grown up by the 6th respondent in Sy.No.94 situated at Shedgar village, Matthur hobli, Thirthahalli taluk. The petitioners, in terms of the agreement have cut the ‘Akashia trees’ in the said land and stocked the cut trees adjacent to Grama Panchayat school premises. The 6th respondent wrote several letters on different dates to the 3rd and 4th respondents requesting to grant permission to the petitioners to transport the trees from the school premises. However, the said respondents have not given permission to the petitioners to transport or sell them. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court for a writ of mandamus as sought for.
3. Learned Government Advocate filed objections to the main writ petition and contended that the very writ petition filed for the reliefs sought for is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. It is further contended that as per the records, the petitioner No.1 is the Forest Contractor for the year 2014-15. A Forest Contractor is only eligible to undertake contract legally entrusted to him by the department and not otherwise. Further, the petitioners have made the 4th respondent as the Sub-Divisional Forest Protection Officer for Shedgar branch, which does not exists in the Forest Department. Therefore, the 4th respondent is not a proper party to the writ petition.
4. Learned Government Advocate further contended that even if there is an alleged agreement between the petitioner and the Grama Panchayat, the same has not been signed by the Panchayat development Officer and hence, the same cannot be accepted. It is further contended that the 3rd respondent has given a felling order to cut and transport ‘Akashia Trees’ to the Grama Panchayat and not to the petitioners. The felling orders dated 26.6.2014, 27.6.2014, 28.6.2014 and 1.7.2014 as per Annexures R1 to R4 clearly depict that the permission granted to the Grama Panchayat and not to the petitioners. The Range Forest Officer has valued ‘Akashia Trees’ both before cutting of trees and after felling of trees and he has determined the taxes and Forest Development Tax that has to be paid to the Government by the Grama Panchayat as per Annexures R5 and R6. The Panchayat has not paid the aforesaid taxes and Forest Development Tax till date. The Grama Panchayat of Shedgar village has taken a decision to auction the aforesaid felled ‘Akashia Trees’ and as such on 12.8.2014, they wrote a letter to the Range Forest Officer not to give permission for transportation of the felled ‘Akashia Trees’ till auction takes place as per Annexure-R7.
5. Learned Government Advocate also contended that when things stood thus, the local journalist and other natives of Thirthahalli have given a complaint regarding illegal agreement of sale of ‘Akashia Trees’ made by the Grama Panchayat vide letter dated 11.8.2014. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent has informed the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Thirthahalli to make a spot inspection of felled 684 ‘Akashia Trees’ and to submit a report and also not to grant transport permission until further orders are issued. The 3rd respondent has given his opinion on 29.11.2014 to the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Panchayat, Shimoga to put the felled trees in public auction and remit 50% of the auctioned amount for the development of Grama Panchayat and the remaining 50% for the development of the forest area in the said village as per Annexure-R10. It is further contended that the felling permission is given to the 6th respondent - Grama Panchayat, Shedgar and not to the petitioners. The petitioners are no way concerned to the trees concerned. In the absence of any judicially enforceable right, writ of mandamus cannot be issued and therefore sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. Sri Venkatranarayana, learned counsel for the Respondent No.6 submits that the petitioner No.1 instituted a suit in O.S. No.302/2014 seeking mandatory injunction and other consequential reliefs against the Respondent No.6 in respect of ‘Akashia trees’, which is the subject matter of this writ petition. The trial Court rejected the application filed by the present petitioner for grant of Injunction in O.S. No.302/2014 by the order dated 6.10.2016. Subsequently, the appeal filed by the petitioner No.1 in M.A. No.14/2016 against the said order came to be dismissed as not pressed. Learned counsel also filed a memo along with the interim order passed by the trial Court in O.S. No.302/2014. In the circumstances, he submits that the petitioner cannot avail parallel remedy before this Court and therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable and sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, according to the petitioners, they have entered into an agreement with the 6th respondent – The President and PDO, Grama Panchayat on 12.6.2014 to buy ‘Akashia trees’ grown up by the 6th respondent in Sy.No.94 situated at Shedgar village, Thirthahalli taluk and in terms of the agreement, they have cut the ‘Akashia trees’ in said land and stocked the cut trees adjacent to Grama Panchayat school premises. Inspite of several letters written by the 6th respondent on different dates to the 3rd and 4th respondents requesting to grant permission to the petitioners to transport the trees, the said respondents have neither given permission to the petitioners to transport or sell them and therefore, the petitioners are before this Court for the reliefs sought for.
8. It is the specific case of the Government that it is for the Grama Panchayat to take necessary steps and the petitioners are no way concerned with the trees and therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable. It is not in dispute that the State Government in the statement of objections has categorically stated that the 3rd respondent has intimated the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Panchayat, Shimoga by letter dated 29.11.2014 to put the felled trees in public auction and to remit 50% of the auctioned amount for the development of the Grama Panchayat and the remaining 50% for the development of the forest area in the said village.
9. Except the unregistered alleged agreement, the petitioners have not produced any material documents. The felling permission is given to the 6th respondent – Grama Panchayat and not to the petitioners. The petitioners are in no way connected to the trees concerned. The petitioners have not made out any judicially enforceable right as well as a legally protected right to issue a writ of mandamus as sought for. On that ground also, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.
10. It is also not in dispute that the 1st petitioner filed O.S. No.302/2014 against the Grama Panchayat and others for the relief of mandatory injunction and permanent injunction in respect of ‘Akashia trees’, which is the subject matter of the present writ petition. In the said suit, the petitioner No.1 also filed an application to grant Temporary Injunction restraining the Respondent No.6 from alienating the standing ‘Akashia trees’ to anybody. The said application came to be dismissed by the order dated 6.10.2016. Against the said order, the petitioner No.1 preferred M.A. No.14/2016 and the said appeal came to be dismissed as not pressed by the order dated 8.12.2018. In the circumstances, the petitioner cannot seek parallel remedy before this Court simultaneously.
11. In view of the above, the petitioners have not made any ground to issue writ of mandamus in exercise of the powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-