:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5408 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 5408 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 5408 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 10400 OF 2006 CIVIL APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 10400 OF 2006 CIVIL APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 10400 OF 2006 Hazrat Mohd Afzal’s Khan’s Memorial Society ..Petitioner versus Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Vaibhav Krishnan i/b. Anupama B. Shah for the Petitioner. Mr. S. S. Pakale, Mr. Y. R. Mishra and Mr. R. C. Master for the Respondent No.1. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and S. A. BOBDE, JJ. S. A. BOBDE, JJ. S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATE : 31ST JANUARY, 2008. DATE : 31ST JANUARY, 2008. DATE : 31ST JANUARY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. This petition was listed for hearing yesterday when we heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the State Government. But before any order could be passed, this court wanted to hear the Union of India. Today, we heard learned counsel for the Union of India. Learned counsel for the State Government is not present today. 2. Learned counsel for the Union of India states that they have filed counter affidavit of :2: Santosh Kumar, Dy. Conservator of Forests, Government of India, and the copy of the same is also served upon the petitioner. But we do not find any counter affidavit on our file. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by a letter issued by the Conservator of Forest, Regional Office, Western Region Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India. The operative part of the Order reads as under: "In inviting a reference to the above, I am directed to convey the decision of Central Govt. to withdraw the approval accorded to the above mentioned project vide this office letter at reference (2) on the request of the State Government sent to this office vide letter at reference (3)." 4. On 17.5.2002 the Government of India gave its approval for diversion of 0.2218 ha of forest land for construction of Dharamshala and Public Road in Satara District subject to certain conditions. In Clause (h) of the condition, it was laid that the diversion would be allowed for 10 years when it will be reviewed for further continuance. :3: 5. By the impugned letter this approval has now been withdrawn. The grievance of the petitioner is that this approval has been withdrawn without any show cause notice to the petitioner or without assigning any reason. 6. We have gone through even a copy of the counter affidavit, which has been shown to us by the counsel for the Petitioner. Even in that counter affidavit, it is nowhere stated that any notice was given to the petitioner before the impugned order was passed and it has also been done at a request of the State Government. Therefore, we quash the impugned letter and consequential orders passed and allow this Writ Petition. The respondents are however at liberty to proceed against the petitioner if they so choose and pass appropriate orders after giving them a chance to defend. 7. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, civil application for stay does not survive, the same also stands disposed of. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) :4: (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)