Supreme Court Directs Data-Based Decision on New Wood-Based Industries in Uttar Pradesh image for SC Judgment dated 22-04-2022 in the case of The State of Uttar Pradesh & O vs Uday Education and Welfare Tru
| |

Supreme Court Directs Data-Based Decision on New Wood-Based Industries in Uttar Pradesh

The legal dispute in The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. vs. Uday Education and Welfare Trust & Ors. revolved around the establishment of new wood-based industries in Uttar Pradesh. The issue reached the Supreme Court after the National Green Tribunal (NGT) quashed the state’s proposal to grant licenses for 1,350 new wood-based industries, citing environmental concerns and lack of sufficient data on timber availability.

Background of the Case

In 2019, the State of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification proposing the issuance of licenses for 1,350 new wood-based industries. The proposal was challenged before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) by multiple petitioners, including Samvit Foundation, Uday Education & Welfare Trust, and U.P. Timber Association. The petitioners argued that the establishment of new wood-based industries would lead to illegal deforestation and was not backed by sufficient data on timber availability.

The NGT directed the state government to provide district-wise data on existing sawmills, the capacity of wood-based industries, and the availability of timber species-wise. The state government submitted a report on August 3, 2019, stating that sufficient timber was available. However, on October 1, 2019, the NGT expressed prima facie disapproval and ordered status quo on the establishment of new wood-based industries.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/environmental-clearance-and-industrial-operations-supreme-courts-verdict-on-ex-post-facto-approval/

Arguments by the Petitioners

The petitioners opposed the establishment of new wood-based industries, arguing that:

  • The proposal was not supported by any credible data on timber availability.
  • Allowing more industries would lead to illegal logging and depletion of forest resources.
  • The government failed to conduct a proper scientific study on the impact of granting new licenses.
  • There was already an oversupply of wood-based industries in the state.

They further argued that the government had a responsibility to apply the precautionary principle of environmental law, which mandates that any action that could harm the environment should be avoided unless sufficient proof exists to show that it is safe.

Arguments by the State of Uttar Pradesh

The state government defended its decision, arguing that:

  • The new industries would generate employment and boost the rural economy.
  • There was sufficient timber availability to support the proposed industries.
  • New industries would reduce dependency on traditional crops and encourage tree plantation.
  • The proposal would attract investments of Rs. 3,000 crores and create around 80,000 jobs.

The government also stated that 632 out of the proposed 1,215 wood-based industries had already been issued provisional licenses and were ready for operation. The status quo imposed by the NGT was causing severe hardship to these businesses.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/environmental-clearance-and-land-use-change-supreme-court-sends-back-ngt-case-for-review/

NGT’s Decision

On February 18, 2020, the NGT quashed the state’s proposal and directed that:

  • The government must conduct a species-wise and district-wise inventory of timber before granting licenses.
  • The Forest Survey of India (FSI) should conduct a scientific study to assess the impact.
  • The licenses granted under the March 1, 2019 notification were invalid.
  • No new industries should be established until an assessment is completed.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court, comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, reviewed the NGT’s decision and found merit in its reasoning. The Court emphasized:

“Prima facie, we are in agreement with the Tribunal that data has to be collected by the State before permitting new wood-based industries.”

The Court reviewed multiple minutes of meetings from the State Level Committee held between 2018 and 2019. It noted that:

  • On May 4, 2018, the committee decided to grant permission for new industries only after obtaining a study from the Indian Plywood Industries Research & Training Institute (IPIRTI), Bengaluru.
  • On September 7, 2018, the committee reversed its earlier decision and proceeded with licensing without any additional study.
  • The state relied on outdated data from 2010 without conducting a fresh assessment.

Final Ruling

The Supreme Court upheld the NGT’s decision and ruled that:

  • The state must first conduct a comprehensive timber assessment before granting any new licenses.
  • The study should be conducted by an independent agency such as the Forest Survey of India (FSI).
  • The appeals against the NGT’s order would be listed for final hearing in August 2022.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision upholds the importance of scientific data and environmental sustainability in policymaking. The ruling ensures that economic development does not come at the cost of environmental degradation. The government must now conduct a proper study before taking any further action on new wood-based industries.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-environmental-protection-odisha-stone-quarries-must-comply-with-wildlife-conservation-plan/


Petitioner Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors..
Respondent Name: Uday Education and Welfare Trust & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Justice B.R. Gavai.
Place Of Incident: Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 22-04-2022.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: the-state-of-uttar-p-vs-uday-education-and-w-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-22-04-2022.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Environmental Cases
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
See all petitions in Judgment by L. Nageswara Rao
See all petitions in Judgment by B R Gavai
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in Stayed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments April 2022
See all petitions in 2022 judgments

See all posts in Environmental Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Environmental Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Environmental Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Environmental Cases Category

Similar Posts