central empowered committee report (i) of the cec in writ petition
central empowered committee report (i) of the cec in writ petition central empowered committee report (i) of the cec in writ petition
iv) the lessee has been found to be involved in illegally widening the forest road without approval under the FC Act; v) the Hon’ble High Court has not directed to allow the lessee to destroy the evidence of having committed illegality and no specific direction to fill up the mining pit was given; vi) no verification was done as to whether the material removed in the garb of over burden contained saleable iron ore. The statement of the lessee has not been recorded in this regard. The compounding of the case has been further accentuated with the recommendations for approval under the FC Act for release of additional 70.41 hectares of forest land in favour of the lessee (dealt with in subsequent paragraphs); vii) the method of valuation of loss relating to the forest and environment was not approved by the senior officers of the Forest Department / Government and a view on the same should have been taken first before compounding the case; 92
viii) the case involved wilful violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act. The Deputy Conservator of Forest has no power to compound the violation of the FC Act; ix) the illegal mining was done in the forest area in violation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order dated 12.12.1996. The Deputy Conservator of Forest has no power to compound the violation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order. 13. Another serious issue in the case relates to the fact that the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Bellary Division and Conservator of Forest, Bellary Circle have recommended grant of approval under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of additional 70.41 hectares of forest area in which illegal mining and encroachment have been found by the Lokayukta, Karnataka and for which forest offence case was registered. 14 M/s Lakshminarayana Mining Company made an application dated 29.8.2007 to the Department of Mines and Geology on the purported advice of the Indian Bureau of Mines. The Director, Department of Mines and Geology vide letter dated 22.8.2007 requested the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest to accord forest clearance for 70.41 93
- Page 41 and 42: favour of M/s Shiva Vilas Trust, wh
- Page 43 and 44: Hon’ble Karnataka High Court are
- Page 45 and 46: sanctioned lease area, the Lokayukt
- Page 47 and 48: notification issued under Section 4
- Page 49 and 50: directed to be undertaken in a time
- Page 51 and 52: y them because of mining leases ill
- Page 53 and 54: However, the formal approval under
- Page 55 and 56: 16.3.2011 (enclosed at ANNEXURE-R-4
- Page 57 and 58: 7. There have been consistent compl
- Page 59 and 60: demarcated the mining lease of M/s.
- Page 61 and 62: satellite imageries. During the sit
- Page 63 and 64: y the S.B. Minerals, as seen in the
- Page 65 and 66: considered view that the joint surv
- Page 67 and 68: 67 man’s land available for illeg
- Page 69 and 70: 69 Lokayukta, Karnataka, report of
- Page 71 and 72: CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE REPORT
- Page 73 and 74: prosecute the FIR dated 3.2.2009 an
- Page 75 and 76: 3. Similar directions have been pas
- Page 77 and 78: 6. The findings of the Lokayukta, K
- Page 79 and 80: illegality in respect of mining lea
- Page 81 and 82: CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE REPORT
- Page 83 and 84: hectares of already broken up fores
- Page 85 and 86: (iii) Deputy Conservator of Forests
- Page 87 and 88: the leased out area which is not di
- Page 89 and 90: compliance of the directions of the
- Page 91: Report. A copy of the note of the P
- Page 95 and 96: the Conservator of Forest, Bellary
- Page 97 and 98: egard to the iron ore seized by the
viii) <strong>the</strong> case <strong>in</strong>volved wilful violation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Forest<br />
(Conservation) Act. The Deputy Conservator <strong>of</strong><br />
Forest has no power to compound <strong>the</strong> violation<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> FC Act;<br />
ix) <strong>the</strong> illegal m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g was done <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> forest area <strong>in</strong><br />
violation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order<br />
dated 12.12.1996. The Deputy Conservator <strong>of</strong><br />
Forest has no power to compound <strong>the</strong> violation<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order.<br />
13. Ano<strong>the</strong>r serious issue <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case relates to <strong>the</strong> fact<br />
that <strong>the</strong> Deputy Conservator <strong>of</strong> Forest, Bellary Division and<br />
Conservator <strong>of</strong> Forest, Bellary Circle have recommended<br />
grant <strong>of</strong> approval under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for<br />
diversion <strong>of</strong> additional 70.41 hectares <strong>of</strong> forest area <strong>in</strong> which<br />
illegal m<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and encroachment have been found by <strong>the</strong><br />
Lokayukta, Karnataka and for which forest <strong>of</strong>fence case was<br />
registered.<br />
14 M/s Lakshm<strong>in</strong>arayana M<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g Company made an<br />
application dated 29.8.2007 to <strong>the</strong> Department <strong>of</strong> M<strong>in</strong>es and<br />
Geology on <strong>the</strong> purported advice <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Indian Bureau <strong>of</strong><br />
M<strong>in</strong>es. The Director, Department <strong>of</strong> M<strong>in</strong>es and Geology vide<br />
letter dated 22.8.2007 requested <strong>the</strong> Pr<strong>in</strong>cipal Chief<br />
Conservator <strong>of</strong> Forest to accord forest clearance for 70.41<br />
93
Change language