(2010) 12 Supreme Court Cases 303
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI., DEEPAK VERMA AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.
CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, WWF-I. – Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – Respondents
IAs Nos. 2, 92, 52, 95, 54, 67, 76,83-84,37, 100, 104-05, 116-23, 128-31, 133 and 135-36 in WP (C)No. 337 of 1995
Decided on : January 12,2010
Environmental and Wildlife laws – States which have not filed status reports directed to file the same within six weeks – MoEF directed to file affidavit dealing with the difficulties expressed by the various State Governments in terms of the order passed on 11-1-2007. (Para 1, 2)
IAs Nos. 37 and 52:
ORDER
IAs Nos. 2 and 92
1. All the States which have not filed their status reports are directed to file the same within six weeks.
2. MoEF is directed to file an affidavit dealing with the difficulties expressed by the various State Governments in terms of the order passed by this Court on 11-1-2007.
IAs Nos. 37 and 52
3. The State of Uttarakhand wants to file its response regarding the alleged construction of powerhouse inside the wildlife protection area.
4. IA No. 52 relates to the rehabilitation of about 1400 Gujjar families occupying the land within Rajaji National Park. We are told that some of the families have already been shifted but still large number of families are to be shifted to the place of rehabilitation.
5. The State is requested to take steps in this regard within a short time and is directed to file an affidavit as to what steps have been taken by it in this regard within a period of six weeks.
IA No. 95
6. Certain lands in the wildlife protection area were leased out to the Irrigation Department and Jal Vidyut Nigam of the State of Uttarakhand. We are told that about 120 unauthorised occupants have settled therein.
7. The State is directed to file an affidavit of its stand in this regard within a period of six weeks.
IA No. 54
8. Report awaited from the National Board for Wildlife. List after receipt of the same.
IAs Nos. 67 and 76
9. Report awaited from the National Board for Wildlife. List after receipt of the same.
IAs Nos. 83-84 and 135-36 c 10. IAs Nos. 135-36 are allowed.
11. The State Forest Department has made its recommendation to the Forest Advisory Committee. FAC to take a decision regarding the encroachment. FAC's recommendation is awaited.
12. List after the receipt of the report of FAC. If the Government has not d sent the proposal already, it is directed to send the same to FAC within six weeks.
IA No. 100
13. Delink and list separately on 11-2-2010.
IAs Nos. 104-05
14. Report awaited from the National Board for Wildlife. List after the receipt of the same.
IAs Nos. 116
15. The State of Uttarakhand has not submitted the proposal in the prescribed format to MOEF. The State is directed to submit the proposal f accordingly within six weeks.
16. To be listed after the receipt of the report.
IAs Nos. 122-23
17. The applicant is not present. Adjourned.
IAs Nos. 128-29
18. The construction of Adwa-Meja Link Canal was approved by the National Board for Wildlife subject to certain conditions. The main condition being the shifting of 10 villages. The State had agreed to rehabilitate the people of the said 10 villages, but now it is stated by the State that it is not feasible and the project could be implemented even without the shifting of the villages. Therefore, the matter should again go to NBWL for exploring the feasibility of the proposal.
19. NBWL to examine the matter and give its report within a period of six weeks.
IAs Nos. 130-31
20. As regards Dhauladhar Wildlife Sanctuary, the applicant has not submitted its proposal in the prescribed format to the State.' The applicant may send its proposal in the prescribed format to the State and the State in turn may send the same to MOEF. MOEF may consider the same within a b period of six weeks.
21. List after the receipt of the report of MOEF.
IA No. 133 22. Adjourned.
Court Masters
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.