Asks Collector to issue notice to company before taking action

Quashing an order of Nilgiris Collector that cancelled permission granted to a private estate in Pandalur taluk to cut 963 trees, the Madras High Court on Friday remanded the matter to the Collector for considering the issue afresh.

Allowing a writ petition filed by Harissons Malayam Limited, which owns rubber and tea estates across Kerala and Tamil Nadu, including Wentworth Estate at Cherangode, Justice D. Krishnakumar held that the permission ought not to have been cancelled arbitrarily without putting the petitioner on notice.

The permission to fell as many as 963 Ayni Pala (Artocarpus hirsutus) trees was granted on November 13, 2017 to the tea estate spread over 1,362 acres at Cherangode village of Pandalur Taluk. However, the Collector cancelled the permission in February after finding out that documents were forged to show the trees were planted and not naturally grown.

The Judge directed the Collector to issue a notice to the petitioner company within three days from the date of receipt of court order and grant a week’s time thereafter to the company to submit its explanation as to why permission should not be cancelled.

After hearing the company’s stand, the Collector should pass a detailed order within three weeks, the judge said and directed the petitioner to extend its cooperation. In the meantime, a status quo as on date should be maintained. Neither the 92 trees already felled should be removed from the estate nor any new tree should be cut, he said.

In its affidavit, the company claimed that the tea estate had been in existence for more than a century and in the course of its tea plantation activity, it planted several species of trees, including Grevillea, Mesopsis, Eucalyptus and Aynipala for providing shade to the plantation besides serving as fuel trees.

Cotending that the trees in the estate have to be felled and removed periodically to make way for improved cultivation and plantation, the company said: “The income received from the sale of certain number of such trees is used for planting new trees, re-generation as well as their maintenance.”

Accordingly, last year, it made an application under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Hill Areas (Preservation of Trees) Act of 1955 to the district committee chaired by the Collector seeking permission to fell and remove 1,136 Ayni Pala trees (prized for their durable timber comparable to the quality of teak) from its estate.

On November 13, 2017, the committee, after perusing the reports submitted by various authorities, granted permission to fell 963 trees. After obtaining the permission, the petitioner company felled 92 trees. However, to its shock, the Collector on February 14 revoked the permission without any notice and hence the present petition.

Opposing it, District Forest Officer V.C. Rahul, in his counter affidavit, accused the company of various irregularities. He claimed that the permission to fell trees had been obtained on the basis of forged documents to substantiate a false claim that none of the trees had grown spontaneously and that all of them were planted in 1944.

He claimed that the alleged forgery came to light only after a public interest litigation petition was filed in the High Court early this year. Soon, the permission was revoked and a police complaint was lodged against the petitioner company by the Forest Range Officer of Cherambadi. Though a First Information Report was filed on May 11, 2018, the company had not disclosed the fact in the present writ petition, the DFO claimed. Further, the DFO said the trees which had grown spontaneously in forest areas could not be permitted to be felled as per the directives issued by the Supreme Court.

Though the permission required the company to inform the forest officials at least a week before the felling, no such intimation was given. Further, the logs had been dumped in the estate in such a way that the officials could not take stock properly.