IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 RP.No. 626 of 2008 IN W.P.(C)NO.2521/2008 -------------------- PETITIONER : ----------------- K.B.GIRISH, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR RESIDING AT KIZHAKKOOTTIL HOUSE VARANDARAPPILLY, TRICHUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.P.GOVINDAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, VAT CIRCLE, CHAVAKKAD. 2. THYCAUD GRAMA PANCHAYAT PALUVAI CHAVAKKAD, TRICHUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY. 3. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER CIVIL STATION, TRICHUR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT GOVT.SECRETARIAT TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------------------- R P No. 626 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Heard the Review Petitioner and the Government Pleader. Review petitioner purchased a saw mill in Chavakkad. However, when the petitioner applied for Registration under the KVAT Act, the same was not considered for want of license from the Panchayat. Panchayat has not issued license because the petitioner has not produced NOC from the Forest Department. When the WP (C) came up for disposal, this Court directed the Forest Department to consider and pass orders on petitioner's request for NOC. However, NOC is rejected vide annexure 1 issued on 24.4.2008 stating that petitioner has to get clearance from Central Empowered Committee constituted by the Supreme Court under interim order in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad etc., v. Union of India and others, reported in AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 1228. The Review Petition is filed by the petitioner stating that while disposing the Writ Petition this Court did not consider Ext.P10 issued by the R P No.626 of 2008 2 Government under which petitioner was not required to obtain any clearance from the Central Empowered Committee. Counsel for the petitioner also relied on Ext.P12 Judgment, whereunder a Division Bench has held that forest clearance is required only if the saw mill or other industry is located within 5 kilometers from a Reserve Forest. I find force in the contention of the petitioner because admittedly Chavakkad is far way from any forest. Moreover petitioner is not starting a new saw mill but applied for license for an old saw mill which he purchased. In the circumstances and by virtue Ext.P10 order of the Government and Ext.P12 judgment of this Court, petitioner is entitled to get panchayat license without any clearance from Forest Department or Central Empowered Committee. Consequently, review is allowed, by modifying the judgment in the WP(C) dated 11-4-2008 with a direction to Panchayat to consider petitioner's application for license without the requirement of any NOC from the Forest Department. In other words, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible, license should be issued by the Panchayat without any delay. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Judge R P No.626 of 2008 3 bps bps R P No.626 of 2008 4