Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

Karnataka High Court Hears Numerous Writ Petitions Challenging Forest Development Tax Notifications and Demands. Petitioners Contend That the Notifications under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 are Ultra Vires the Constitution and Central Forest Laws.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-10-24 13:20:09
  • 99
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

Whether the notification dated 16.08.2008 issued under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 is ultra vires the Constitution of India and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and whether forest development tax can be levied.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (KAR) (12) 31

W.P. No. 2642/2009 (GM-MM-S) and connected writ petitions

2015-12-03

Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, Acting Chief Justice; B.V. Nagarathna, J.

K. Raghavacharyulu for D.R. Ravishankar (for petitioner); Ravivarma Kumar, Advocate General, A.S. Ponnanna, Additional Advocate General, Y.H. Vijay Kumar, Additional Government Advocate (for respondents)

National Mineral Development Corporation Limited (NMDC Ltd.)

State of Karnataka, represented by its Secretary, Forest, Ecology and Environment Department; Deputy Conservator of Forest, Bellary Division

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging notifications and demand notices under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963.

Remedy Sought

The petitioners seek to quash notifications dated 16.08.2008 and demand notices for forest development tax, and declare the notification ultra vires.

Filing Reason

The State of Karnataka imposed forest development tax and issued demand notices under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, which the petitioners contend is unconstitutional and beyond legislative competence.

Issues

Whether the notification dated 16.08.2008 issued under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 is ultra vires the Constitution and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Whether the demand of forest development tax is valid.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227, 246, Seventh Schedule Entry-54 List I
  • Karnataka Forest Act, 1963: Section 98A
  • Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
forest development tax notification ultra vires mining lease writ petition Karnataka Forest Act Forest (Conservation) Act constitutional validity

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Commissioner's Order on Retirement Age and Back Wages. Workman Held Entitled to Wages Including Back Wages Under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. 2026-11-01 06:25:14
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Appeal by Original Owners and Subsequent Purchasers — Holders Have No Locus as Land Vested in Government After Final Notification Under City of Mysore Improvement Act, 1903; Sale During Pendency of Challenge R... 2026-11-01 06:25:13
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition murder natural justice acquittal compensation burden of proof Land Acquisition limitation jurisdiction Article 226
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Upholds Developer's Challenge to Arbitration Award — ...

High Court Quashes School Tribunal's Order on Employee Reinstatement Due to Procedural Irr...

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction and Death Sentence in POCSO Case Due to Credible Testimon...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against High Court's Reversal of Trial Court's Decree on Wi...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Accused in IPC Sections 376, 420, 493, 494, and 495 Case...

Supreme Court Restores Appellate Tribunal's Order on Tariff Determination Due to Breach of...

Supreme Court Upholds Appellant's Challenge to High Court Orders in Civil Appeal — Legal...

Lost Your Password?