Jim Corbett National Park- SC Slams Former Uttarakhand Forest Minister For Damaging Environment For 'Political And Commercial Gains'; Issues Directions For Ecological Restitution
The Supreme Court, while delivering the Judgment in the Jim Corbett Safari Case, slammed the former Uttarakhand Forest Minister Harak Singh Rawat and then Divisional Forest Officer Kishan Chand for causing heavy damage to the environment for political and commercial gains.
The Supreme Court was delivering its Judgment in an application filed by Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, alleging therein that illegal construction of bridges and walls within the Tiger Breeding Habitat of Corbett Tiger Reserve and that too, without the approval from the Competent Authority was being carried out. He had sought intervention of the Court to protect and conserve the Biological Diversity, flora and fauna as well as the ecology of the Corbett National Park.
Advocate K. Parameshwar was appointed as Amicus Curiae to understand whether such safaris should be allowed in a National Park or a Wildlife Sanctuary.
The Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed, “Section 38XA of the WLP Act which was inserted by the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022 (No. 18 of 2022) makes the legislative intent amply clear. It provides that, the provisions contained in the said Chapter shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of the provisions relating to sanctuaries and National Parks (whether included and declared or are in the process of being so declared) included in a tiger reserve under this Act. It could thus be seen that the entire emphasis of the WLP Act is on the conservation, protection, and management of wildlife. Various provisions contained in the WLP Act, discussed hereinabove, emphasize on providing measures for the conservation, protection and management of wildlife. The provisions contained in Chapter IVA lay a specific emphasis on the protection of tigers and other habitats in the tiger reserve. The provisions contained therein are in addition to the provisions contained for sanctuaries and National Parks.”
Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal appeared as Applicant-in-person and ASG Aishwarya Singh Bhati appeared on behalf of the Union of India during the pronouncement.
Justice B.R. Gavai explained the importance of Tigers in the ecosystem and which was also succinctly described in ‘Mahabharta’, and said “The tiger perishes without the forest and the forest perishes without its tigers. Therefore, the tiger should stand guard over the forest and the forest should protect all its tigers.”
The Bench also discussed the Public Trust Doctrine and observed that in the present case the Former Forest Minister Harak Singh Rawat and then Divisional Forest Officer Kishan Chand have disregarded the law and for commercial purposes indulged in the illicit felling of trees on a mass scale to construct buildings on the pretext of promotion of tourism.
The Court said, “In the present case, it is clear beyond doubt that the then Forest Minister and Mr. Kishan Chand, DFO considered them to be the law unto themselves. They have, in blatant disregard of the law and for commercial purposes, indulged in the illicit felling of trees on a mass-scale to construct buildings on the pretext of promotion of tourism. This is a classic case that shows how the politicians and the bureaucrats have thrown the public trust doctrine in the dustbin. Though Mr. Kishan Chand, DFO was found to have been involved in serious irregularities at his earlier postings, and even though the Authorities had recommended not to post the said officer at any sensitive post, the then Hon’ble Forest Minister inserted his name in the proposal relating to transfer and postings at a sensitive post."
The Court further said, "Not only that, even after the NTCA found Mr. Kishan Chand, DFO involved in serious irregularities, and the Secretary (Forests) recommended placing him under suspension, the then Hon’ble Forest Minister has not only overruled the recommendation of the Secretary (Forest) for suspension but also justified his proposed posting to the Lansdowne Division. It was only after the then Hon’ble Forest Minister demitted his office, that Mr. Kishan Chand, DFO could be put under suspension. This is a case that shows how a nexus between a Politician and a Forest Officer has resulted in causing heavy damage to the environment for some political and commercial gain. Even the recommendation of the Senior Officers of the Forest Department, the Vigilance Department, and the Police Department which objected to his posting at a sensitive post have been totally ignored.”
The Supreme Court noted that the matter against the Minister and the DFO is still under investigation by the CBI. The Court said that the law will take its own course and to bring the culprits to face the proceedings is a different matter and restoration of the environmental damage already done is a different matter.
The Court discussed the principles of ecological restitution and held that the restitution has to be done as per the local situation and the compensatory forestation, which if done at some other place does not meet the requirement of the ecological restitution. The Court said that the State cannot run away from its responsibility to restore the damage done to the forest and the State apart from preventing such acts in the future has to take immediate steps for restoration of the damage already done, to determine the valuation of the damage done and to recover it from the persons found responsible for causing such a damage.
Finally, the Court concluded, “It is well known that the presence of the tiger in the forest is an indicator of the wellbeing of the ecosystem. Unless the steps are taken for the protection of the tigers the ecosystem surrounding around tigers cannot be protected. The figures which are placed before us show that there has been a substantial reduction in tiger poaching and an increase in tiger strength throughout the country. That should not be enough, the ground realities cannot be denied, like illegal constructions and illicit felling of trees on a rampant scale like the one that happened in the Corbett National Park, cannot be ignored. Steps are required to prevent this.”
The Government of Uttarakhand was requested to suggest more effective management of the tiger in India. Accordingly, they had given their suggestions but there was no coherence in the suggestions given by different authorities, their suggestions were conflicting and contrary to each other.
The Court observed, "It is also brought to our notice that in the Ramnagar area as also in other areas around the Corbett Tiger Reserve, there is a mushrooming growth of resorts, which are acting as a hindrance to the free movement of animals including the tigers and elephants. It is also brought to our notice that similarly, there is a mushrooming growth of resorts around various Tiger Reserves throughout the country which are now being used as marriage destinations. It is brought to our notice that in the said resorts, music is played at a very loud volume which causes disturbance to the habitat of the forests. Undisputedly, the mushrooming growth of resorts within the close proximity of the protected areas and uncontrolled activities therein, including sound pollution are capable of causing great harm to the ecosystem. We propose to issue certain directions in that regard in the operative part of our judgment."
The Court gave the following directions that need to be issued in the interest of justice:
The Safaris which are already existing and the one under construction at Pakhrau will not be disturbed. However, insofar as the Safari at ‘Pakhrau’ is concerned, we direct the State of Uttarakhand to relocate or establish a rescue centre in the vicinity of the ‘Tiger Safari’.
The MoEF&CC shall appoint a Committee consisting of the following:
(i) a representative of the NTCA;
(ii) a representative of the Wildlife Institute of India
(iii) a representative of the CEC; and
(iv) an officer of the MoEF&CC not below the rank of Joint Secretary as its Member Secretary.
- The Committee shall recommend the measures for restoration of the damages, assess the environmental damage, identify the persons/officials responsible for such damage and specify how the funds so collected be utilized for active restoration of ecological damage.
- The Committee shall see whether Tiger Safari will be permitted in the buffer and fringe area, guidelines for establishing such Safaris, type of activities that should be permitted and prohibited, number and type of resorts that should be permitted within the close proximity of the protected areas, etc.
The Court lastly directed, “The CBI is directed to effectively investigate the matter as directed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in its judgment and order dated 6th September 2023...The present proceedings shall be kept pending so that this Court can monitor the steps taken by the Authorities as well as the investigation conducted by the CBI.”
The Supreme Court on an earlier hearing told the National Conservation Authority(NTCA) that the plan for tiger safari within a national park cannot be permitted as the approach is “tourism-centric”, which should be “animal-centric”. The Bench said, “We will not permit animals in the zoo to be kept in cages at national parks”.
Accordingly, the Committee was asked to share the preliminary report and the CBI shall submit the report within three months. The matter is now listed after 12 weeks.
Cause Title: In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union Of India & Ors. and In Re: Gaurav Kumar Bansal (Neutral Citation:2024 INSC 178)
Appearances:
Applicant: Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, Applicant in person
Respondents: Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the Union of India and Senior Advocate A.N.S. Nadkarni appeared for the State of Uttarakhand.
