K. K. Vasant v. State of Karnataka. Pays/Territoire Inde Type de cour Nationale - cour supérieure Date Jan 29, 1991 Source UNEP, InforMEA Nom du tribunal High Court of Karnataka Juge Hegde, M.C.Urs, C. Numéro de référence AIR 1992 Kant 256 Langue Anglais Sujet Questions juridiques, Forêts Mot clé Droit constitutionnel Compétence juriductionnelle Mesures de protection des forêts Participation du public Gestion forestière/conservation des forêts Foresterie communautaire Service forestier/agents forestiers Accès-à-la-justice Résumé The petitioner made the following allegations: The provisions made under the Forests enactments in Karnataka and the Rules framed thereunder do not make provisions for declaring certain areas as Core forest or Virgin Forest particularly in the hill ranges on the western side of the Karnataka State; Forest produce has been allowed to be exploited by forest based industries without sufficient precaution being taken by the State Government to preserve the lost forest wealth in allowing such exploitation; Legislation governing the subject of preservation of forests and protection of animals therein falls short of the requirements of cultivation and scientific exploitation of the forests; Exploitation of forests should be totally stopped and the forest produce based industries must be de-licenced and prevented from utilising the forest produce; No provision is made by the State Government to take steps for sufficient afforestation to compensate for the loss due to ill-planned exploitation of the forests by the State Government as well as by the individuals and licenses in exploiting the forest produce. The State submitted that by intensifying its activities in the conservation of forests in general and striking a balance between industralisation in production as well as preservation of forests and development of irrigation and allied projects as a comprehensive development plan, it has done its duty and the provisions of law in that behalf are adequate. The Court stated that under the scheme of separation of powers envisaged by the founding fathers of the Indian Constitution, the three wings of the Government must function in the respective spheres independently of each other. Thus, the petitioner request could not be so construed as to conferment of powers by the constitution to interfere with the daily routine administration of the state or in the making of laws by the legislature. Judicial review must be strictly understood to protect the rights of the citizens, when their legal or constitutional rights are affected by any order or legislature enactment and not otherwise. Where it relates to matters of policy of the Government, where it relates to making of laws, the court has no role whatsoever to play. It must be always left to the executive will and the wisdom of the legislature. The Court advised the petitioner to move the concerned legislators who come from the Western Ghats to take initiative and to fill up the lacuna, if any, pointed out by any Expert Committee and get the relief which the court is unable to give. The court dismissed the petition and also refused to grant a certificate of fitness to appeal. Texte intégral COU-159310.pdf