1997 INSC 0026
                                                    State of Orissa

                                                           Vs

                                                Duti Sahu and Others

                                          Civil Appeal No. 316 of 1997

                                       (K. Ramaswamy, G. T. Nanavati JJ)

                                                      13.01.1997

                                                        ORDER

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment dated 29-3-1996 passed by the Division
Bench of the Orissa High Court in OJC No. 1389 of 1996. The admitted position is that the
respondents are displaced persons and they sought for and were granted assignment of the land in
reserved forest by the State Government on various dates between 1982 and 1985 for cultivation.
One of the conditions for the grant was that the trees standing on the land allotted to them "shall be
the property of the property of the State Government". It is clear from Selection 2 of the Forest
Conservation Act, 1980 that it contemplates restrictions on the derservation of forests or use of
forest land for non-forest purpose and postulates thus :

                  "2. Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force
                  in a State, no State Government or other authority shall make, except with the prior
                  approval of the Central Government any order directing, -

                  (i) that any reserved forest (within the meaning of the expression 'reserved forest' in
                  any law for the time being in force in that State) or any portion thereof, shall cease to
                  be reserved;

                  (ii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be used for any non-forest
                  purpose;

                  (iii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be assigned by way of lease or
                  otherwise to any private person or to any authority, corporation, agency or any other
                  organisation not owned, managed or controlled by Government;

                  (iv) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be cleared of trees which have
                  grown naturally in that land or portion, for the purpose of using it for
                  reafforestation."

5. Having overlooked these crucial statutory provisions, the High Court has directed, by the
impugned order, at the behest of the respondents, by way of writ of mandamus, issuance of Timber
Transit Permits to the respondents. The question is whether the impugned direction issued by the
High Court is correct in law. Expect with prior permission of the Central Government, deforestation
is impermissible. It is seen that it cannot be disputed that lands are situated within reserved forest
area. In the lands assigned to the petitioner, the trees are standing. In terms of the grant made to
them, the trees belong to the Government. Under those circumstances, for the reason that it is a
reserved forest area since the grant was made only for the purpose of cultivation the respondents
have no manner of right whatsoever to deforest the land and to cut and carry the trees belonging to
the Government much less without the permission of the authority.

6. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The order of the High Court stands set aside. No costs.