1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION P.I.L.NO.2/2007 Narayan Laxman Rane Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondents Mr.R.S.Apte,Sr.Counsel with Mr.V.A.Bubna for Petitioner Mr.V.A.Gangal,Special counsel with Mr.S.N.Bhosale and Mr.Pandey A.G.P.for Res.1 to 6 Mr.Anil Singh with Mr. D.R.Shah and Ms.P.Mani Bajpai for res.7 CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE : 21st APRIL,2010 P.C. . In the affidavit filed by Naresh Adkuji Zurmure, Deputy Conservator of Forest, Sawantwadi Forest Division , Sawantwadi it is set out that the working plan for the project was approved by the competent authority viz.Ministry of Environment and Forests vide letter dated 27/5/2003. It was only after assessment of Eco Tourism Potential of the said site at Dhampur , works were proposed to realize the potential of the site for promotion of Eco Tourism in the larger interest of forest and nature conservation. The scheme envisaged 2 creation of basic minimum facilities and handing over these to the local community represented by the Forest Protection Committee. However, taking prior sanction for the Eco Friendly Tourism Center was not obtained and hence post facto sanction was asked for. Entire area is 58 hectors and the area covered for the project is 1.25 hectors The Ministry of Environment and Forest after considering the application made by the State Government has passed order dated 9/4/2010. In the said order it is observed that after careful consideration of the proposal of the State Government, the Ministry of Environment and Forests agrees in principle for diversion of 1.25 hectors of reserved forest land for construction of Eco Tourism Center at Dhamapur. . The said order has imposed conditions which has been annexed alongwith the affidavit which includes compensatory afforestation over 2.5 hectors of degraded forest land over area identified by the Forest Department . Similarly there are conditions in the matter of charging the net present value in terms of the directions of the Supreme Court laid down in Godavarman’s case , which is pending. In other words the directions are in the terms laid down by the Supreme Court for diversion of forest land for non- forest purpose. 3 2] Considering the above nothing further survives in this petition . If according to the petitioner the permission itself is illegal it will be open to him to file independent petition to challenge the same . This petition will not stand in his way. With the above observations the petition is disposed of. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.)