TRAVELLERS have failed in a High Court challenge against moves to kick them off an unauthorised caravan site in Green Belt land.

A High Court judge today rejected their appeal against a planning inspector's backing to a Wycombe District Council enforcement notice ordering the group to move from Hemley Hill.

They moved there illegally over the Easter Bank Holiday weekend in 2009, and appeals against an eviction notice from the council and the result of a subsequent public inquiry has delayed their removal.

One of the travellers, Kathleen Murphy, appealed against the planning inspector's decision to allow the enforcement notice and took it to a Judicial Review.

But today at London's Royal Courts of Justice top judge Mr Justice Foskett dismissed her legal challenge, saying the inspector had not breached the principles of natural justice and it could not be argued that his reasoning was inadequate.

Mrs Murphy claimed the Secretary of State should have granted a permanent or temporary permission for her and her fellow travellers to stay at Hemley Hill, near Princes Risborough.

The site, which is located within Green Belt land in the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, is owned by Patrick Hanrahan, who was refused permission to build nine caravan pitches by the council.

Mrs Murphy argued the planning inspector who considered the case failed to take into account material considerations which included the South East Plan - which had particular relevance to the vital issue of local and regional need for gypsy sites and the Council's failure to provide them - and national gypsy policy guidance contained in a 2006 Government circular.

She also said she was not invited to make proper representations to the planning inspector when the matter went before him and that he failed to give proper and adequate reasons for what she branded an "irrational" and "unreasonable" decision.

But the judge said he did not accept her criticism of the procedures adopted, saying the "bottom line" was that any arguments in favour of allowing Mrs Murphy’s challenge were outweighed by the arguments against it.

He added that there were no "very special circumstances" to overcome the normal rules against inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

Final decisions on the appeals against the enforcement had been put on hold until after today's Judicial Review.