1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:16.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL WP(MD)No.8407 of 2011 and MP(MD)Nos.1 & 2 of 2011 L.Nagarajan :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Ltd., Trichy. 2.The Regional Manager, Tamil nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Ltd., 5th Street, Subramaniapuram South, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. 3.The Secretary to Government, Environment of Forest, Fort. St. George, Chennai. 4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Panagal Maligai, Chennai. 5. V.Karuppaiah :Respondents (Respondents 3 and 4 were impleaded as respondents as per the order of this Court dated 24.8.2011. Respondent No.5 was impleaded as party respondent as per the order of this Court dated 23.11.2011 in M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2011.) This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from planting Eucalyptus Trees in the extent of 90.70 Hectares at Sangarapathi and in the extent of 30.80 Hectare at Kalipuli in Karaikudi Division. For petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.V.Rajaseakran For Respondents 3 &4 : Mr.R.Anandharaj,Government Advocate For Respondent No.5 : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu ORDER (Order of the Court was made by K.N.BASHA, J) This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the relief of a direction forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from planting Eucalyptus Trees in an extent of 90.70 Hectares at Sangarapathi and in an extent of 30.80 Hectares at Kalipuli in Karaikudi Division. 2.The case of the petitioner is that he is a resident of Kallupatti Village and, about 1000 families are residing in the said village. Most of the families in the village are depending on agricultural work. The canals situated in and around the village are the water source for them and water flow is mainly depend upon monsoon. The second respondent is maintaining cashew grove in an extent of 90.70 Hectares in Sangarapathi and 30.80 Hectares in Kalipuli within Karaikudi Division. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.It is stated that village people are utilising the cashew grove as cattle field for domestic animals after getting prior permission from the second respondent. Such being the position, now the second respondent is cutting the cashew trees and is planning to plant Eucalyptus Trees in an extent of 90.70 Hectares at Sangarapathi and 30.80 Hectares at Kalipuli The petitioner and others raised objections by way of their representation dated 14.7.2011 to the respondents as it would affect their water source As no action was taken on such representation, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court by preferring the present Writ Petition. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no reason to remove the cashew trees, instead, to plant Eucalyptus Trees It is contended that in view of the removal of cashew trees and planting eucalyptus trees, the water source available to the petitioner and their villagers would be very much affected. As such, the petitioner has preferred a representation and the same was not considered, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court with the present Writ Petition. 5.Mr. M.Thirunavukkarasu, learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent, one of the villagers, would submit that there is no justification for the petitioner to come forward with such a Writ Petition to prevent the respondents 1 and 2 from planting Eucalyptus Trees, which are very much helpful to the villagers. It is contended that in the event of planting Eucalyptus Trees, the villagers can bring their cattle for grazing in the field and they will not be affected in any manner. It is contended that Eucalyptus Trees are meant only for the public health and as such, there is no reason to object the same. 6.Mr.V.Rajasekaran, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, would submit that already huge investments have been made for procuring plants and in view of the interim order granted by this Court, the respondent Corporation have been put to great hardship and irreparable loss. It is contended that only with a view to maintain and improve the environment as well as with a view to protect the public health, respondents 1 and 2 have planned to plant Eucalyptus Trees and the same in no way would affect the water source of the villagers. It is contended that villagers are very much in support of such project of planting Eucalyptus Trees by the respondents 1 and 2 and there is no justification to prevent the same. 7.We have given our careful and anxious consideration on the rival contention put forward by either side and perused materials available on record. 8.At the outset, it is to be stated that the present Writ Petition is only filed by the petitioner as a Public Interest Litigation but the way the affidavit filed before this Court makes it abundantly clear that it is only a private interest litigation petition. The said factor is made very clear by the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent who has been impleaded and who is none of the villagers. It is clearly submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent that, absolutely, the villagers have no objection for the respondents 1 and 2 in planting Eucalyptus Trees and the same would not affect the public in any manner. 9.It is needless to state that Eucalyptus Trees are meant for preparing medicine and the same would not cause any harm. We are unable to countenance the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 the planting of Eucalyptus Trees would affect the water source, for the simple reason that one of the villagers has also appeared before this Court, namely, the fifth respondent and stated that the villagers have no objection whatsoever in respect of planning to plant Eucalyptus Trees. Accordingly, we are constrained to dismiss the Writ petition as devoid of merits Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar / Vacation Officer / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Ltd., Trichy. 2.The Regional Manager, Tamil nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Ltd., 5th Street, Subramaniapuram South, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. 3.The Secretary to Government, Environment of Forest, Chennai. 4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Panagal Maligai, Chennai. +1CC to Mr.D.Venkatesh, Advocate. SR.No.44744. (asvm) RP/03.01.2012/3P/6C. W.P.(MD)No.8407 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 16.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/