IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, N.K.CHANDRAVANSHI, JJ.
Nitin Singhvi S/o Late N.C. Singhvi – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPPIL No. 17 of 2019
Decided on : 14-08-2023
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 - Section 38-V (4) (ii) and 38-O(2) - Wildlife Sanctuary - Petition against abrogation of recommendation of National Tiger Conservation Authority – Held, When Section 38 of Act of 1972 mandates that before any order is passed with regard to formation of a Tiger Reserve, it is mandatory for State Government to consult tribals and other forest dwellers living in said area concerning relocation and as said mandatory procedure was not complied with, State Government has rightly rejected proposal for formation of a Tiger Reserve which was duly communicated to NTCA by Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Wildlife Management) - From bare perusal of same, it is apparent that NTCA has merely suggested measures to be taken by State - It is not even a recommendation which needs to be followed in its letter and spirit, especially when other procedural formalities could not be completed for reasons as stated above - No such relief as prayed for by petitioner can be granted in this petition - Public Interest Litigation petition is dismissed.
ORDER :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
1. The petitioner has filed this petition for the following reliefs:
10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any further orders, as it may deem fit, in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. The petitioner, who claims himself to be a social activist and who has been working for protection of environment and for the conservation of wildlife, has filed this petition against abrogation of recommendation of National Tiger Conservation Authority (for short, the NTCA) to declare Bhoramdeo Wildlife Sanctuary (for short, BWS) as a Tiger Reserve and Chilpi Range as buffer zone as is evident from the communication of Under Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Chhattisgarh to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Forest Department, Government of Chhattisgarh dated 09.04.2018. Similar communication has been sent by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Government of Chhattisgarh to Assistant Inspector General of Forests, NTCA, Government of India. The act of the State authorities in not complying with the recommendations of the NTCA is illegal as it is mandatory under the provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (for short, the Act of 1972) for the State to comply with the recommendations of the NTCA to declare any area as a Tiger Reserve.
3. The facts, as projected by the petitioner are that the NTCA vide its order No. 1-12/2018 dated 28.07.2018 recommended Forest Department, Government of Chhattisgarh to declare BWS as a Tiger Reserve. Furthermore, upon the said recommendation of NTCA, the Government of Chhattisgarh also constituted an expert committee for the determination of core and buffer area. In the above mentioned meeting, in-principle, approval was given by the Government of Chhattisgarh to make Bhoramadeo Sanctuary into a Tiger Reserve. In the 10th meeting of the Chhattisgarh State Wildlife Board on 14.11.2017 the proposal for declaring BWS as a Tiger Reserve was discussed in which various parameters in regard to core and buffer zone of Tiger Reserve were finalized and the amended proposal was sent to NTCA. On 09.04.2018, the Under Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Chhattisgarh abrogated the proposal to declare Bohramdeo Sanctuary as Tiger Reserve because the amended proposal did not contain the document in regard to the consultation with the concerned Gram Sabha as prescribed under Section 38-V (4) (ii) of the Act of 1972 and the same was intimated to the NTCA. The task of consulting the Gram Sabha has to be undertaken by the State Government. The recommendation to declare BWS as Tiger Reserve has been annulled by State Government for non-performance of a statutory obligation which was to be undertaken by State Government itself. The State Government cannot abrogate the recommendation, as every authority, as per Section 38-O(2) of the Act of 1972 is bound to comply with the direction of the NTCA in regard to conservation of tigers and their habitat.
4. Ms. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the BWS is situated in Kawardha District of the State and being adjacent to Kanha National Park, it holds out the promise of long-term landscape conservation by facilitating the movement of wildlife through the Kanha-Achanakmar corridor. The importance of the area can be gathered from the report of NTCA titled 'Assessment Report on the Proposed Diversion of 19.62 hectares of Forest Land from BWS for upgradation of Chilpi-Rengakhar-Salhewara Road' wherein the NTCA specifically stated that the road is passing through a wildlife sanctuary and important tiger corrido
Environmentalists' conception of ecological balance in nature is based on fundamental concept that nature is "a series of complex biotic communities of which a man is an inter-dependant part” and tha....
The establishment of a Tiger Safari in buffer zones is permissible under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, provided it adheres to ecological and statutory guidelines, emphasizing the public trust doctr....
Encroachments on deemed forest land require immediate removal per demarcation; sustainable development near wildlife corridors mandates forest inputs; time-barred claims on pre-existing structures no....
The court reaffirmed the necessity of protecting tiger habitats against unlawful human encroachment, emphasizing compliance with environmental laws and the importance of prior clearances for any deve....
Unnotified tiger corridors require precautionary human-wildlife conflict measures, but NGT cannot declare urban areas as reserves; time-barred challenges to pre-existing constructions; encroachments ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the non-availability of funds cannot be an excuse for non-compliance with a statutory duty, especially when it is pursuant to the Directive Pr....
The court affirms the protection of forest areas under the Forest (Conservation) Act, emphasizing the need for strict compliance with environmental laws during development within ecologically sensiti....
The court emphasized the necessity for compliance with environmental laws to protect wildlife habitats, ruling that educational institutions must operate within legal frameworks for environmental con....
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.