Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 15534
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 18.03.2021 Delivered on : 26.03.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI W.P.(MD)Nos.925 of 2021, 11982, 17277 and 17415 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.783 & 784 of 2021, 10326, 10328 & 10329 of 2020, 14465, 14467 of 2020, 1144 & 2373 of 2021 and 14555 & 14558 of 2020 W.P.(MD)No.925 of 2021:-
Black Rock Hill Planters Association, Rep. by its Secretary, Mr.P.Lalaji No.6, Perumal Street, K.P. Road, Ramavarmapuram, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Indiraparyavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The 41st ESZ Expert Committee, Rep. by its Chairman, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi.
3.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
4.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari.
5.The District Forest Officer, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned Gazette Notification in CG-DL- E-23092020-221903, dated 22.09.2020, on the file of respondent No.1, quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the objections submitted by the petitioners Association, dated 21.07.2020 and pass orders within the time frame to be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For R1 & R2 : Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri Assistant Solicitor General of India For R3 to R5 : Mr.Sricharan Rengarajan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss Special Government Pleader W.P.(MD)No.11982 of 2020:-
1.S.Elango Kalaisigamani
2.P.Chellapandi
3.C.Durai
4.P.Ramakrishnan 5.K.Chandrasekar
6.P.Chandran
7.G.Suresh
8.V.Samuthirapandi
9.N.Paul Nadar 10.P.Murugesan
11.T.Balakrishnan
12.M.Kannan 13.G.Thomas
14.P.Sukumar ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Indiraparyavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, Aliganj, New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The Chairman, Expert Committee for Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ), Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Indiraparyavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
3.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Environment and Forests Department, Chennai – 600 009.
4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, Panagal Maaligai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
5.The District Collector, Collectorate, Kokkirakulam, Tirunelveli – 627 009.
6.The District Forest Officer and Wildlife Warden, Tirunelveli Division, Tirunelveli – 627 007.
7.The District Forest Officer and Wildlife Warden, Kanniyakumari Division, Nagercoil – 629 001. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of Notification gazetted and published on 20.02.2020, by the first respondent, bearing S.O.No.795(E) and consequential report of the Expert Committee, dated 24.06.2020, consists of second respondent, pertaining to the declaration of petitioners' Villages viz., Pazhavoor, Karunkulam and Levinchipuram Villages of Radhapuram Taluk in Tirunelveli District as Kanniyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary Eco-sensitive Zone, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to retain the petitioners' Villages viz., Pazhavoor, Karunkulam and Levinchipuram Villages of Radhapuram Taluk in Tirunelveli District as ''Zero Meter'' Eco-sensitive Zone.
For Petitioners : Mr.P.R.Raman Senior Counsel for Mr.C.Seethapathy For R1 & R2 : Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri Assistant Solicitor General of India For R3 to R7 : Mr.Sricharan Rengarajan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss Special Government Pleader W.P.(MD)No.17277 of 2020:-
M.Satheesh ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government of India, Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Indiraparyavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The Chairman, 41st ESZ Expert Committee, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi.
3.Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
4.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District.
5.The District Forest Officer, Kanyakumari District, 6.The Deputy Manager (Tech)-cum-The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, PIU Nagercoil, No.395/3-1, M.S.Road, Majestic Colony, Near Ayyappankottai, Parvathipuram, Nagercoil – 629 003.
7.A.Ajikumar
8.S.Robinson ... Respondents [R6 to R8 are impleaded vide order dated 08.02.2011, in W.M.P.(MD)Nos.49, 1143 and 1368 of 2011 in W.P.(MD)No.17277 of 2020]
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining to Gazette Notification, dated 22.09.2020 in CG-DL-E-23092020-22193 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Puhazh Gandhi For R1 & R2 : Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri Assistant Solicitor General of India For R3 to R5 : Mr.Sricharan Rengarajan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss Special Government Pleader For R6 : Mr.Su.Srinivasan Standing Counsel for NHAI For R7 : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan Senior Counsel for Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi For R8 : Mr.Isaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for M/s.Isaac Chambers W.P.(MD)No.17415 of 2020:-
S.Austin ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government of India, Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Indiraparyavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The Chairman, 41st ESZ Expert Committee, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi.
3.Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
4.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, 5.The District Forest Officer, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining to Gazette Notification, dated 22.09.2020 in CG-DL-E-23092020-22193, issued by the first respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh For R1 & R2 : Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri Assistant Solicitor General of India For R3 to R5 : Mr.Sricharan Rengarajan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss Special Government Pleader * * * * *
COMMON ORDER
(Common Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.) W.P.(MD)No.11982 of 2020 has been filed challenging the draft Notification of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New Delhi, while W.P.(MD) Nos.17277 and 17415 of 2020 and 925 of 2021 are filed laying a challenge to the final Notification. Accordingly, all of them are taken up and disposed of by this common order.
2.Kanniyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary forms part of the Western Ghats housing a minimum of 40 types of mammals, 120 species of birds, including 14 species of migratory birds and rich diversity of fishes, reptiles and amphibians and there are more than 2272 species of flowering plants recorded here apart from 62 species of orchids and 91 species of ferns with the existence of animals like Asian Elephant, Indian Gaur, Sambar Deer, Wild Boar, Wild Dog, Tiger, Leopard etc., Thus, the bio-diversity of the area is rather rich. Kanniyakumari District is unique, as it is sandwiched between the sea and the forest with the human population in between.
3.Indian Board of Wildlife in its Wildlife Conservation Strategy-2002, contemplated Eco-fragile Zone. Accordingly, Eco-sensitive Zones are perceived under the National Environment Policy, 2006 and Eco-sensitive Zone is meant to create some kind of ''Shock Absorber'' to stand between human population and the forest to maintain the Eco-system. Hence, it acts as a transition zone giving protection to areas involving lesser protection. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Goa Foundation v. Union of India [(2014) 6 SCC 590] directed the stakeholders to look into the said aspect while clarifying the fixation of 10 Kms. from the boundaries of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. The following paragraphs will be apposite:-
''50. When, however, we read the order dated 4.12.2006 of this Court in Writ Petition (C) No.460 of 2004 Goa Foundation v. Union of India [(2011) 15 SCC 79], we find that the Court has not prohibited any mining activity within 10 kilometer distance from the boundaries of the National Parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries. The relevant portion of the order dated 04.12.2006 is quoted hereinbelow:
'The Ministry is directed to give a final opportunity to all States/Union Territories to respond to its letter dated 27th May, 2005. The State of Goa also is permitted to given appropriate proposal in addition to what is said to have already been sent to the Central Government. The Communication sent to the States/Union Territories shall make it clear that if the proposals are not sent even now within a period of four weeks of receipt of the communication from the Ministry, this Court may have to consider passing orders for implementation of the decision that was taken on 21st January, 2002, namely, notification of the areas within 10 km. of the boundaries of the sanctuaries and national parks as eco-sensitive areas with a view to conserve the forest, wildlife and environment and having regard to the precautionary principles. If the State/Union Territories now fail to respond, they would do so at their own risk and peril.
The MoEF would also refer to the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife, under sections 5 (b) and 5 (c) (ii) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, the cases where environment clearance has already been granted where activities are within 10 km. Zone.'
It will be clear from the order dated 4.12.2006 of this Court that this Court has not passed any orders for implementation of the decision taken on 21st January, 2002 to notify areas within 10 kms. of the boundaries of National Parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries as eco sensitive areas with a view to conserve the forest, wildlife and environment. By the order dated 04.12.2006 [(2011) 15 SCC 79] of this Court, however, the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, was directed to give a final opportunity to all States/Union Territories to respond to the proposal and also to refer to the Standing Committee of the National Board
