RVMJ:

79.02.2015

R.S,A. No.B9l2015

ORDER ON I.A. 1/2015

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and

the learned Government Advocate appearing for the

respondents,

2. The following substantial question of law

arises for consideration :

"Whether the judgment and decree of the

courts below are perverse in holding thatSection-2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act,

1980 is not applicable to the facts and

circumstances of the suit?"

Admit. Call for records.

Paper books to be filed in 12 weeks.

3. It is contended that pursuant to the

dismissal of the suit, the respondents are continuing

-2-

with the construction activities, os well as the

expansion of Muthodi Nature Camp' Since the

questionoflawiswithregardtointerpretationof

seciton-2 of the Forest (conservation) Act, and in

viewofthevariousdirectionsissuedbytheHon,ble

Supreme Court of India, it is only just and necessary

thatthepresentstatus-quooftheforestandthe

construction be maintained. If any construction or any

other activity is permitted to be continued' the same

will run contrary to law as well as the directions issued

bytheHon,bleSupremeCourt.Hence,Ideemitjust

and necessary that all further construction, expansion

etc., of the Muthodi Nature Camp located in the

-3-

Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary in the

property, be stayed till the disposal

I.A.tl2O15 is accordingly allowed.

I I caPY I I

suit schedule

of this appeal.

sd/-JIIDGE.

To: l, 'ftre Prl. District.lttclge.2. 'l'he Senior tlivil .Jttclge,

\.' \\,(^,---'-ts/"t--{K. SHTVANNAI

ASSISTANT R.EGISTRAR

4;nkrv(lhikkanragnlurtt.Cirikkaiuagalu'tt.

.r l}le- u.rft (N! !/vltrchIIIeQ;:

D) i'im t1,.. ,

r.ha...gpo. r,g) 'inr" clti.:. r.r.ci*u.q,.. iri,.,,- ,

lJ H.tHt:;,,.,for clcjlve,!t Thqr6iar.t ._i+: .lyirrrntl qrnlter. tn .

uroE'iJ;H#"Sffix'560.,r

€