The Chief Secretary of a state has a legal duty to enforce wildlife protection laws and cannot disregard these responsibilities under external influences.

1This PIL has been filed making allegations as contained in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, they are reproduced below -

"5. That the petitioner states that one Pu. Hranghleikapa of Samphai in the State of Mizoram donated a barking deer on 14-6-2000 which he found in the forest at Samphai to Pu. K Vanlaluava, Minister of State, Government of Mizoram for handing over the same to the Government run Mini Zoo at Aizawl. Then the said Minister by his Government Gypsy vehicle No. MZ - 01-2082 carried the deer to Aizawl. While transporting the said wild animal, the said Sri K. Vanlaluava did not obtain any permission from the Chief Wild Life Warden of any Authorized Officer of the State Government as contemplated under S.48(A) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 . Later on, it was found that the servants of the said K Vanlaluava prepared the meat of the animal for the purpose of the dinner hosted by K Vanlaluava in honour of the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State.

6. That the aforesaid facts were reported in the local newspapers in Mizoram and on the demand of animal lovers of the State, the Government of Mizoram, through the Chief Secretary directed Sri S. S. Patnaik, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests - cum - Secretary, Environment and Forests to conduct the enquiry into the matter either by himself or through the DFO (Wildlife), Aizawl. That the Divisional Forest Officer (Wildlife), Aizawl made necessary enquiry into the matter and submitted his report before the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests on 4-7-2000. On the basis of the said report, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests - cum - Secretary, Environment and Forests by his letter under memo No. UOPB / 1/9B / CON / PCCF, dated 7-7-2000 intimated the Chief Secretary that the Barking Deer which was killed by the Minister of State falls under Schedule 3 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and he has committed an offence under S.39(3)(A) and S.48(A) of the .

A copy of the report dated 7-7-2000 along with the statement of Pu. K. Vanlalauva made before the Enquiry Officer are annexed herewith and marked as Annexures 1 and 2 respectively.

7. That your petitioner states that after the receipt of the enquiry report, the Government assured the Public as well as the Legislative Assembly that appropriate action will be initiated soon against Pu. K. Vanlalauva for his commission of offence under Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 . But surprisingly enough, in the very first week of August, 201, the Chief Minister has directed the Chief Secretary not to pursue the matter and not initiate any action under the Wild Life (Protection) Act against his aforesaid colleague. Being encouraged by such direction, the said colleague of Chief Minister and his other colleague have started visiting different forests and have resorted to indiscriminate killings of rare wild animals, such as Barking Deer, Wild Boar etc. ....... "

2. The report of the enquiry conducted by Sri B. S. Patnaik, the Chief Conservator of Forests - cum - Secretary, Environment and Forests, Government of Mizoram, has also been filed along with the petition. From the allegations made in the petition and the enquiry report submitted thereof, it prima facie appears that some offence has been committed under the Wild Life (Protection) Act and the Rules framed thereunder and the Chief Secretary to the Government of Mizoram is duty bound to follow the law and cannot refuse to perform his duties under the guidance and directions of any authority.

3. Under the facts and circumstances, we direct the Chief Secretary to the Government of Mizoram to take appropriate steps in the matter in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of placement of a certified copy of this order before him.

4. The petition stands disposed of.