The National Green Tribunal on 28th February 2013 directed to State of Maharashtra for issuing necessary guidelines for timely scrutiny and processing of proposals that sought approval from the central government for the use of forest land for non-forest purpose. The Tribunal directed the state to issue directions so as to regulate the internal procedures to avoid delay and to process the proposals within the time frame prescribed by the Forest (Conservation) Rules 2003. These were issued in view of delay caused in processing the proposal that took 1 year to communicate the decision of refusal of extension of time for lifting and transporting bauxite. The National Green Tribunal was hearing appeal petition filed by Hindalco Industries Ltd against the State of Maharashtra, Forest Department and Principal Chief Conservator of Forest in Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others in Appeal No. 64/2012 wherein it challenged the communication issued by state refusing the proposal of Hindalco seeking extension of time for lifting and transporting stacked mined out bauxite. Hindalco also prayed for issuance of direction by the tribunal to state government to refer the said proposal for approval to the central government under Forest (Conservation) Act and Rules 2003. The Forest (Conservation) Rules 2003 provide for submission of proposal by concerned industries to the state government seeking approval from central government to use forest land for non-forest purpose. The tribunal dismissed the appeal petition and observed that issuance of direction to the state government was outside the appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal under section 16 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The Tribunal observed that the applicant does not have a vested legal right to insist favorable recommendation of the proposal and subsequent approval from the central government under the Forest (Conservation) Rules 2003 and the State government has the discretion to forward the proposal to the central government and this power cannot be circumvented (by-passed) by giving such a direction. The tribunal also observed that question of approval from central government arises only after the state government has made the request. The tribunal observed that Hindalco was aware of time limit granted for forest clearance to effectuate the transportation of mined out bauxite and ought to have done within the stipulated time-frame and further observed that Hindalco had extracted maximum bauxite during the monsoon season with the expectation of receiving permission of lifting and transporting the same subsequently which was frustrated by the refusal of the proposal. The matter before the Tribunal pertained to the seeking of approval for extension of time for lifting bauxite that had piled near the mine site during the mining process. The state of Maharashtra on reports duly reached after inspection of sites refused to grant the permission. The transportation of the piled bauxite requires forest clearance that has huge adverse impact on the environment of the site. Hindalco already had the permission to lift and transport the same through clearance of forest till a fixed date. The fixed date was due to expire and therefore Hindalco presented proposal to the state government and sought from approval from central government. Hindalco after refusal from the state appealed to National green tribunal to issue direction to state government to refer the proposal to central government. The Tribunal refuse to issue such direction on the fore said reasons. The Tribunal observed that the Forest Conservation Rules also stipulate that the proposal shall deem to be rejected if on expiry of time limit for the receipt of the proposal from the state government, the proposal hasn’t received. The Tribunal also observed that Rules do not prescribe any reasons to be recorded for the decision and hence it was not obligatory for the state of Maharashtra to do so. The tribunal further observed that the State is bestowed with discretionary power under the Forest (Conservation) Rules and as no penal action was imposed on Hindalco, so, therefore principles of natural justice were not attracted.
Skip & continue
Disclaimer
In Compliance with Indian Regulations, Kindly Review the User Acknowledgement and Disclaimer below and then Proceed.
User Acknowledgement
By proceeding further and clicking on the "ACCEPT" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about Law Senate (LS) for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from Law Senate (LS) or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this website. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below
This website (www.lawsenate.com) is a resource for informational purposes only and is intended, but not promised or guaranteed, to be correct, complete, and up-to-date. Law Senate (LS) does not warrant that the information contained on this website is accurate or complete, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or any other cause. Law Senate (LS) further assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the information contained on this website, nor does it offer a warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The owner/Partners of this website do not intend links from this site to other internet websites to be referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with the linked entities. Law Senate (LS) is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties about, the contents of Web sites to which links may be provided from this Web site.
This website is not intended to be a source of advertising or solicitation and the contents of the website should not be construed as legal advice. The reader should not consider this information to be an invitation for a lawyer-client relationship and should not rely on information provided herein and should always seek the advice of competent counsel licensed to practice in the reader's country/state. Transmission, receipt or use of this website does not constitute or create a lawyer-client relationship. No recipients of content from this website should act, or refrain from acting, based upon any or all of the contents of this site.
Furthermore, the owner of this website does not wish to represent anyone desiring representation based solely upon viewing this Web site or in a country/state where this website fails to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state. Finally, the reader is warned that the use of Internet e-mail for confidential or sensitive information is susceptible to risks of lack of confidentiality associated with sending email over the Internet.
As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, lawyers are not permitted to advertise themselves. The information about the Firm, its Key Practice Areas or its Key Team Members provided under this website is only for informational purposes and it should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertisement of any nature whatsoever.
The information provided on this website is for general information only. It is not intended to create or promote an attorney-client relationship and does not constitute and should not be relied upon or construed as legal advice.
Communications via this website also do not create an attorney-client relationship. Visitor should always seek appropriate professional advice before acting on the basis of any information contained herein.
