Disposed

Jai George v. the District Collector

Kerala HC30 Sept 2021WP(C)/20393/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Corporation of Cochin to conduct a census of existing trees and take protective measures under the Kerala Promotion of Tree Growth in non-Forest Areas Act, 2005 within four months. The court disposed of the petition regarding police action on specific past incidents without further direction.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Corporation of Cochin to carry out a census of existing trees and take protective measures under Section 4 of the Act within four months.

Jai George Vs the District Collector — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

-1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶5

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶7

THURSDAY, THE 30^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 8TH ASWINA, 1943

¶8

WP(C) NO. 20393 OF 2018

¶9

PETITIONER/S:

¶10

JAI GEORGE AGED 47 YEARS

¶11

S/O. P.J GEORGE, AGED 47 YEARS, PULICKAL HOUSE ,K.P PADMANABHAN ROAD, AYYAPPANKAVU, COCHIN - 682 018.

¶12

BY ADV SMT.DAISY A.PHILIPOSE

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

¶15

ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

¶16

2 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

¶17

COCHIN CITY, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

¶18

3 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

¶19

4 THE ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS SOCIAL FORESTRY ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

¶20

5 THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY – 682 031.

¶21

BY ADV K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, SC FOR R5 ADV TEK CHAND, SR. GP FOR R1 TO R4

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

W.P.(C) No. 20393 of 2018 -2-

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

S. Manikumar, C. J.

¶26

Petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

¶27

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 3 to take immediate and effective action against the culprits who felled the trees, which were growing on the Government land just opposite to the Central Mall near M.G.Road.

¶28

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 4 to carry out take immediate census of the existing trees and to take effective action to protect the remaining trees, within the Corporation limits.”

¶29

Short facts leading to the writ petition are as hereunder:-

¶30

According to the petitioner, he is a permanent resident of Ernakulam Village coming under the Cochin Corporation. Petitioner

¶31

is aggrieved by the felling of two healthy trees, on the Government land, just opposite to the Central Mall near M. G. Road.

¶32

W.P.(C) No. 20393 of 2018 -3-

¶33

Petitioner has contended that on 18.06.2018, it was reported in Malayala Manorama Daily that one Mango tree and one Fig Tree was cut by about 15 workers in the middle of the night.

¶34

As per G.O.(P) No. 85/86/F&WLD dated 02.09.1986, it was ordered that trees on public lands shall not be felled, without permission from the Assistant Conservator of Forests (Social Forestry) having jurisdiction over the area.

¶35

Petitioner has further contended that as per the news report, though the neighboring street vendors tried to prevent the felling of trees, they were threatened, and though information was given to the Central Police Station, no action was taken by the Police to prevent further felling of the trees, nor the culprits were arrested till date, in spite of the complaint submitted by the concerned Municipal Councilor. Petitioner has also contended that it is highly necessary to take measures to protect the remaining trees in the City, as they are being destroyed.

¶36

W.P.(C) No. 20393 of 2018 -4-

¶37

On 28.09.2021, we passed the following order:-

¶38

“On the prayers sought for, Mr. Tek Chand, learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that based on the complaint of the Secretary, Cochin Corporation, Crime No. 1457 of 2018 under Section 447 IPC r/w Section 35 and 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, has been registered against 5 persons and that on completion of the investigation, a charge sheet has also been filed and the matter is under consideration.

¶39

As regards the second prayer as to whether census had already been undertaken or still to be carried on under Section 4 of the Kerala Promotion of Tree Growth in non-Forest Areas Act, 2005 ('Act, 2005' for short), the Cochin Corporation, the Local Self Government Institutions, has to answer. Section 4 of the Act, 2005 is reproduced hereunder:

¶40

“4. Duties of Local Self Government Institutions.-Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Local Self Government Institutions shall promote tree growth in non-forest areas and be responsible for,--

¶41

(a) the cultivation of saplings in the lands owned or transferred or vested in them;

¶42

(b) carrying out census of the existing trees;

¶43

(c) development and maintenance of nurseries, supply of seeds, saplings and trees at reasonable prices to persons, who are required to plant new trees or to replace trees which have been felled;

¶44

(d) getting the trees planted or transplanted which are necessitated by

¶45

the construction of buildings, new roads or widening of existing roads or for safeguarding danger to life and

¶46

W.P.(C) No. 20393 of 2018 -5-

¶47

property;

¶48

(e) organizing demonstrations and extension services for the purposes of

¶49

this Act and assisting private and public institutions in connection with the planting and preservation of trees; (f) undertaking or executing such schemes or measures, as may be

¶50

directed, from time to time, by the Government for achieving the objects of this Act.”

¶51

Registry is directed to show the name of Sri. K. Janardhana Shenoy, learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Corporation, in the cause list.”

¶52

Mr. K. Janardhana Shenoy has entered appearance on behalf

¶53

of Corporation of Cochin, represented by its Secretary, the 5^th respondent.

¶54

Having regard to the provision extracted and the facts of this case, suffice to direct Corporation of Cochin, represented by its Secretary, the 5^th respondent, the Local Self Government Institution, to carry out census of the existing trees, and take all such measures as per Section 4 of the Kerala Promotion of Tree Growth in Non-Forest Areas Act, 2005. Said exercise be completed within a period of four

¶55

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶56

Corporation of Cochin, represented by its Secretary, the 5^th

¶57

W.P.(C) No. 20393 of 2018 -6-

¶58

respondent, is further directed to issue appropriate instructions to the

¶59

concerned officials, to complete the work within the stipulated time.

¶60

With the above directions, writ petition is disposed of.

¶61

Sd/-

¶62

S. MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY

JUDGE

///TRUE COPY///

P. A. TO JUDGE

W.P.(C) No. 20393 of 2018 -7-

¶70

¶71

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE TREE STUMPS. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY' ON 18/6/2018, WITH ITS TRANSLATION. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF G.O(RT) NO. 68/2010/F&WLD DATED 10/2/2010.

Jai George v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai George v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Local Level Monitoring Committee for Kozhicode Corporation Vs P.v.Ali Mubarq

Jayan Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Jayananda K.R Vs Union of India

Central Board of Secondary Education Vs Pavithra P Venu

Sameera.T.S., Vs the State of Kerala

Anoop Chandran Vs Union of India