43pil61.10.odt 1 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR P.I.L.No.61 of 2010 (Pratap Shamboo Goswami .vs. State and Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Coram: D. D. Sinha and A. P. Bhangale, JJ. Date : 04/03/2011. Heard Mr. S.P.Bhandarkar, Adv. for the petitioner and Mrs.Bharti Dangre, Additional Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4. In the instant petition, the grievance of the petitioner is in respect of State Bamboo Policy evolved by the State Government. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said policy is not in conformity with the National Bamboo policy and does not serve the purpose. It is submitted that 'bamboo' is classified as a forest produce and the National Forest Commission, 2006 has recommended as follows : 43pil61.10.odt 2 . The Indian Forest Act, 1927 needs revamp taking into account current requirements, inter alia; (a) the term “forests” needs to be defined for the purpose of the Act, (b) Non-timber forest products need to be defined. (c ) Bamboo, including ringal and cane must be included in minor forest produce and excluded from 'tree', u/s. 2 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that it is necessary to permit private individuals to grow bamboo on a private land after de-notifying bamboo as a forest produce. The Assistant Government Pleader has submitted that the Conservator of Forest has filed an affidavit dt.10.2.2011 and in paragraph 4 of the said affidavit, has stated thus : “ It is most respectfully stated that the petitioner has annexed the policy titled as “Maharashtra Bamboo Policy” framed by the State in April, 2007 at Annexure-A. It is, however, stated that the said policy is a Draft of the Bamboo Policy which is under 43pil61.10.odt 3 . consideration of the State Government. The State while preparing the Draft Bamboo Policy has taken into consideration the aspects related to Bamboo specifically that bamboo is a botanically a grass and falls under the grass family and that this has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of T.N.Godavaran. It is also not in dispute that the bamboo species has been included as a horticulture crop for taking plantations under E.G.S. by the respondent no. 1 and 3. All these factors have been taken into consideration in framing the draft of the bamboo policy and the State has also taken into consideration the fact that bamboo plays an important part in the life of rural and tribal population of Maharashtra and it is an important natural resource in the State. The State has also considered the use of bamboo for many purposes including its industrial use. The Government of Maharashtra, has therefore, framed the Draft Bamboo Policy to encourage, promote and support the enlargement of the bamboo sector in a comprehensive manner, through a multi- disciplinary, multi-departmental and multi- dimensional approach to provide economic benefits to the people of the State. For its implementation the draft policy also intends to provide for an agency under the title 43pil61.10.odt 4 . “Maharashtra Bamboo Development Agency” which would act as a nodal agency for all bamboo related development activities. The draft policy also provide its implementation through appropriate action plans and implementation programme to be developed by the Forest Department of the State of Maharashtra. It also proposes for a State Level Advisory Committee under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary which would ensure that existing regulations applicable for Bamboo Development are revised to achieve the objectives suggested in the draft policy. It is most respectfully stated that the draft policy which was framed in the year 2007 was again sought to be modified and certain modifications were suggested in terms of implementation of mechanism as well as strategies. The said suggestions were considered and submitted to the State Government by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Maharashtra State, Nagpur by his communication dt. 25.6.2009. It is further stated that on 4.1.2010 the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Maharashtra State, Nagpur has again submitted further modifications to the Bamboo Policy. It is further stated that on 21st September, 2010 certain clarifications which were sought were 43pil61.10.odt 5 . submitted along with the Draft Bamboo Policy which would be placed before the Government for its final approval. “ In view of the above referred statement made by the Conservator of Forest in the affidavit, it is evident that the Draft Bamboo Policy was framed in the year 2007 and same was modified in view of certain suggestions received by the State Government and is at the final stage. It also demonstrates that the Draft Bamboo Policy will be placed before the Government for final approval. The grievance of the petitioner at this stage appears to be pre-mature so far as the Bamboo Policy required to be evolved by the State Government is concerned. The grievance of the petitioner so far as Bamboo being de-notified as a forest produce in view of the recommendations given by National Forest Commission, 2006 is concerned, this is possible only by amending the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and therefore, till such time, the grievance of the petitioner cannot be entertained. For the reasons stated hereinabove and in view of the fact that the State Bamboo policy is at the stage of finalisation, we do not propose to show any indulgence in the present 43pil61.10.odt 6 . Public Interest Litigation at this stage and permit the State Government to finalise the said policy in accordance with the law and procedure applicable in this regard and we expect the State Government to expedite the process of finalising the Draft Policy. With these observations and directions, the petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE jais