This particular decision is held by the High Court Of Karnataka through the division bench Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Ashok S Kinagi in the case of D M Deve Gowda v. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.
The view that the land can either be a “forest” or a “forest land”, but there cannot be any “deemed forest” in absence of any provision under the Act.
The petitioner had approached the court seeking to quash the order and endorsement issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forest (Chikkamagaluru division). Further it was sought to issue directions to the respondent to permit him to do stone quarrying in his land and to issue a quarrying licence.
Orders and judgements
, “In this view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to allow this writ petition without calling for any statement of objections from the respondents as the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Dhananjay (supra) holds good.”
While considering the applications afresh, the concerned authority will have to consider whether the subject lands are “forest” or “forest land” as laid down in the decision of the Apex Court in T N GODAVARMAN vs Union of India and others, (1997), 2 SCC 267.”
If the authority concerned finds that the land is a “forest” or a “forest land”, lease or extension of lease cannot be granted unless the consent of the Central Government is obtained as per section 2 of the Forest Act.”
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement reviewed by- Mohammed Shoaib