Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2005 DIGILAW 754 (SC)

T. N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India

2005-04-08

ARIJIT PASAYAT, S.H.KAPADIA, Y.K.SABHARWAL

body2005
ORDER : I. A. No. ............. filed by Amicus Curiae : Taken on board. 2. Concerned by depletion of population of tigers and other important animals in National Parks and Sanctuaries, this application has been filed by learned Amicus Curiae for seeking directions, inter alia, for constitution of an authority of persons named by National Board of Wild Life (after obtaining leave of the Court) under Section 3(3) of the Environment Protection Act to oversee and supervise the functioning of the National Parks/Sanctuaries listed in Annexure 1' to the application. The said list contains 25 National Parks and Sanctuaries. One of the prayers is that the State Governments be directed to co-operate with the authority in deployment of staff manning these parks and sanctuaries so as to check the menace of poaching. 3. Learned amicus curiae has brought to our notice a photograph showing skins of leopards. It is stated that as per reports, 43 such skins were seized recently and they appear to be of recent and original. Certain other directions have also been sought such as funding and the steps to be taken by the State Governments. Having regard to the enormous problem, we direct the parties to respond to the application within two weeks. 4. List on 3rd May, 2005, if the Bench is available, otherwise on 6th May, 2005. I.A. No. 1265 : 5. List the application on 15th April, 2005. I.A. Nos. 33-34 in WP (C) No. 171/1996 : 6. The matter is referred to CEC for its examination and recommendation. I.A. No. 1300 in I. A. 281; 7. List on 15th April, 2005 along with I.A. No. 1297. I. A. No. 1011 : 8. The MoEF shall place on record the minutes/report of the Standing Committee of IBWL, within two weeks. I.A. No. 1178 in I.A. 620-621 : 9. The State of Madhya Pradesh is granted four weeks' time to file its response to the report of CEC. 10. The report shows that rampant illegal mining had been going on in Shivpuri District prior to the intervention of this Court. This conclusion has been reached by the CEC after going through the submissions made by the applicant, the State Government, the MoEF and the site inspection reports of Shri M. K. Sharma, Additional D. G., Forests, MoEF. 10. The report shows that rampant illegal mining had been going on in Shivpuri District prior to the intervention of this Court. This conclusion has been reached by the CEC after going through the submissions made by the applicant, the State Government, the MoEF and the site inspection reports of Shri M. K. Sharma, Additional D. G., Forests, MoEF. In the opinion of the CEC, such rampant illegal mining could not have happened without the connivance of the officials/officers of the concerned department and the interested parties. One of the recommendations is for taking stern action against the officers and officials of the Revenue Department and Mines Department, who had directly or indirectly caused large scale illegal mining in this area. Before we consider the suggestion of referring the matter to C.B.I., in our view, it would be expedient if the Chief Secretary of the State Government is requested to independently examine the record in his capacity as an officer of the Court and send to this Court his report in a sealed cover giving his opinion as to the persons, prima facie, responsible for such illegal activity. Ordered accordingly. 11. The report shall be filed within four weeks. Contempt Petition (C) No. 499/2004 : 12. The petition is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh petition with more particulars. Contempt Petition (C) No. 412/2004 in I.A. 833 in IA 828 : 13. This petition has been filed for taking contempt action against the respondents, namely, Chief Secretary, Govt. of State of Rajasthan, Additional Director Mines, Department of Mines and Geology, and Director, Directorate Mines and Geology Department, Government of Rajasthan. At present, we are of the view that instead of initiating any contempt action, it would serve the ends of justice if the petition is treated as an interlocutory application seeking directions so as to check illegal mining, particularly, in forest area in the State of Rajasthan. The contempt petition shall, therefore, be treated and numbered as an interlocutory application. 14. Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 15. Reply shall be filed within four weeks. 16. Pending further directions, we restrain any kind of mining in forest area. Further, we restrain mining in any area in Aravali Hills falling in the State of Rajasthan, where permission may have been accorded after 16th December, 2002. 17. Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 15. Reply shall be filed within four weeks. 16. Pending further directions, we restrain any kind of mining in forest area. Further, we restrain mining in any area in Aravali Hills falling in the State of Rajasthan, where permission may have been accorded after 16th December, 2002. 17. The respondents, in their reply, shall give particulars where permission/sanctions for mining of one hectare or less area has been granted and the details of the area so that it would be possible to know the contiguous areas in respect whereof such permission may have been granted. I.A. No. 920 in I.A. 703 and I.A. 988 and I.A. 1129 and I.A. 1151 : 18. The parties are permitted to file affidavits within two weeks. I. A. No. 923 in I.A. 392 : 19. The report shall be filed by the State Government within two months. The amount referred to in the order dated 23rd February, 2004 shall be reinvested for 366 days in a Nationalised Bank. I. A. No. 930 in IAs. 659 and 669 with I.As. 775 and 967 : 20. Learned counsel for the State of Maharashtra states that the final report has already been filed along with I.A.No. 1285. 21. The matter is adjourned. 22. The MoEF shall place on record the final notification, in the meanwhile. I. A.No. 932 in I.As. 819-821 : 23. In case, the Forest Department of the State Government does not co-operate in the lopping of the trees, the Power Grid Corporation is granted liberty to approach the CEC, who will issue necessary directions. 24. List along with the NPV matters. Order accordingly.