MUNISH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the
argument has been advanced that in fact the fuel pump,
under the name and style of M/s Ganpati Gasoline Station, is
being operated and run, not by the petitioner, but by Smt.
Rachna Gupta, and in support of this argument, Petrol/HSD
Pump Dealer Agreement has been annexed as Annexure
no. SA1 to the supplementary affidavit, divulging that the said
agreement was executed between Smt. Rachna Gupta and the
authorized officers of Indian Oil Corporation on 31.12.2007.
(2.) The petitioner has been challaned allegedly for the
offences u/s 33 of the Indian Forest Act r/w Section 2 of the
Forest (Conservation) Act.
(3.) The facts of the case are that after getting the aforesaid
licence by Smt. Rachna Gupta, the filling station was founded
at the place situated on Roorkee-Haridwar road having Delhi
on one side whereas Dehradun on the other. Since the land,
whereupon the filling station established, was 30 meters away
from the main road, hence, the allegation made is that the
area of reserved forest, in between the national highway and
the land of filling station, was destroyed and a cemented
concrete passage, admeasuring 30 x 5 meters of size, was
developed. This was done in order to provide access to the
vehicles for filing up the fuel. No permission whatsoever was
obtained for the task wherefor the complaint has been filed by
the Forest Department.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.