SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 61882

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THIRUVAMBADY DEVASWOM – Appellant
Versus
THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR(CHIEF WILD LIFE WARDEN) – Respondent
WP(C) 27333/2019



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN &

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS RD TUESDAY, THE 3 DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 11TH ASWINA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 27333 OF 2019 PETITIONER:

THIRUVAMBADY DEVASWOM, ROUND WEST, THRISSUR-680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PROF.M.MADHAVANKUTTY.

BY ADV N.MAHESH RESPONDENTS:

1 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR(CHIEF WILD LIFE WARDEN), KERALA FORESTS (WILDLIFE), FOREST HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAUPRAM-695 006.

2 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KODANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN-683 544.

3 ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CHIEF FOREST CONSERVATOR (BIODIVERSITY CELL), FOREST-WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, FOREST HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 4 THE RANGE OFFICER, THRISSUR SOCIAL FOREST RANGE OFFICE, ROUND, THRISSUR-680 001.

SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYAN, SPL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (FORESTS)

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Sophy Thomas, J Thiruvambady Devaswom represented by its Secretary, filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to release the tusks of deceased elephant ‘Thiruvambady Unnikrishnan’ owned by the petitioner, and to issue a certificate of ownership as per Section 42 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’).

2. The petitioner-Thiruvambady Devaswom is having captive elephants in their possession, and one of its elephants by name ‘Thiruvambady Unnikrishnan’ died on 01.04.2017. The 1st respondent-Principal Chief Conservator (Chief Wildlife Warden), had issued certificate of ownership of that elephant to the petiitoner, and a microchip also has been implanted in that elephant. On the death of that elephant, postmortem was conducted and its body was cremated under the supervision of respondents 2 and 3, the Divisional Forest Officer, Kodanad, and Additional Principal Chief Forest Conservator respectively. After preparing mahazar, the 4th respondent- Forest Range Officer took custody of the tusks, in violation of the provisions of Sections 40 to 42 of the Act, which clearly stipulates the procedure for filing declaration certificate, and issuing certificate of ownership of animal trophy. Since the petitioner was not aware of the place where the tusks were kept by the 4th respondent, they were not in a position to file an application for declaration. But, they filed Ext.P5 representation before the 1st respondent on 04.04.2017, and the 3rd respondent-Additional Principal Chief Forest Conservator sent Ext.P6 reply stating that, due to security reasons, for the time being they cannot release the tusks. According to the petitioner, that reply is illegal and unjust, and hence they approached this Court with the above writ petition.

3. The 1st respondent-Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Chief Wildlife Warden, filed counter affidavit admitting that, the petitioner-Thiruvambady Devaswom was in possession of the elephant named ‘Thiruvambady Unnikrishnan’, as per Ext.P1 ownership certificate No.33/90 dated 16.03.1990. It is also admitted that, the said elephant died on 01.04.2017 and its postmortem was conducted on 02.04.2017 at Elephant Cremation Ground, near Perumthodu Forest Station, Kodanad Range. The tusks of the elephant were separated and taken under safe custody by the Forest Department, as a precautionary and security measure, for preventing illegal wildlife trade of ivory. At present, the tusks of the elephant are under the safe custody of the Kerala Forest Department. It is further admitted that, as per Section 42 of the Act, the Chief Wildlife Warden may, for the purpose of Section 40, issue a certificate of ownership, in such form, as may be prescribed, to any person who, in his opinion, is in lawful possession of any wild animal or any animal article, trophy and uncured trophy. It is also admitted that the petitioner requested the Chief Wildlife Warden, Kerala for the custody of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top