- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Centre For Environmental Law, Wwf-I v. Union Of India And Others
Factual and Procedural Background
This order consolidates directions on numerous Interlocutory Applications (IAs) concerning wildlife conservation, rehabilitation of displaced communities, and alleged encroachments or constructions within protected areas. Various States—particularly Uttarakhand—along with the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC), and the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) were instructed to provide affidavits, status reports, or further proposals. Deadlines of six weeks were generally fixed for these compliances, and several matters were adjourned or listed for fresh dates pending those reports.
Legal Issues Presented
The opinion addresses a procedural matter and does not frame distinct legal issues.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court’s reasoning is largely administrative and directive in nature:
- States that had not yet filed status reports were ordered to do so within six weeks, ensuring the court could examine current compliance with earlier conservation directives.
- The MoEF was specifically tasked to address difficulties communicated by State Governments regarding an earlier order dated 11-1-2007, indicating the court’s intent to resolve implementation barriers.
- For Uttarakhand, multiple issues—such as construction of a powerhouse in a wildlife area, rehabilitation of approximately 1400 Gujjar families from Rajaji National Park, and unauthorized occupation of leased land—required separate affidavits within six weeks, demonstrating the court’s emphasis on timely factual clarification.
- Where reports from expert bodies like the NBWL or FAC were still pending, the court simply listed the matters “after receipt of the same,” illustrating a reliance on statutory advisory bodies before passing substantive directions.
- Some applications (e.g., IAs 135-36) were outright allowed, whereas others were delinked or adjourned, reflecting differentiated procedural treatment based on readiness of material before the court.
Holding and Implications
The court issued multiple procedural directions, allowed IAs Nos. 135-36, delinked IA No. 100 for separate listing, and ordered States and central authorities to file necessary reports or proposals within six weeks.
Implications: The immediate consequence is that several governmental bodies must now furnish additional information or take rehabilitative steps, failing which further judicial action may follow. The order does not establish new legal precedent; its impact is confined to ensuring compliance and progress in the pending environmental matters.
Order
IAs Nos. 2 and 92
1. All the States which have not filed their status reports are directed to file the same within six weeks.
2. MoEF is directed to file an affidavit dealing with the difficulties expressed by the various State Governments in terms of the order passed by this Court on 11-1-2007.
IAs Nos. 37 and 52
3. The State of Uttarakhand wants to file its response regarding the alleged construction of powerhouse inside the wildlife protection area.
4. IA No. 52 relates to the rehabilitation of about 1400 Gujjar families occupying the land within Rajaji National Park. We are told that some of the families have already been shifted but still large number of families are to be shifted to the place of rehabilitation.
5. The State is requested to take steps in this regard within a short time and is directed to file an affidavit as to what steps have been taken by it in this regard within a period of six weeks.
IA No. 95
6. Certain lands in the wildlife protection area were leased out to the Irrigation Department and Jal Vidyut Nigam of the State of Uttarakhand. We are told that about 120 unauthorised occupants have settled therein.
7. The State is directed to file an affidavit of its stand in this regard within a period of six weeks.
IA No. 54
8. Report awaited from the National Board for Wildlife. List after receipt of the same.
IAs Nos. 67 and 76
9. Report awaited from the National Board for Wildlife. List after receipt of the same.
IAs Nos. 83-84 and 135-36
10. IAs Nos. 135-36 are allowed.
11. The State Forest Department has made its recommendation to the Forest Advisory Committee. FAC to take a decision regarding the encroachment. FAC's recommendation is awaited.
12. List after the receipt of the report of FAC. If the Government has not sent the proposal already, it is directed to send the same to FAC within six weeks.
IA No. 100
13. Delink and list separately on 11-2-2010.
IAs Nos. 104-05
14. Report awaited from the National Board for Wildlife. List after the receipt of the same.
IAs Nos. 116
15. The State of Uttarakhand has not submitted the proposal in the prescribed format to MoEF. The State is directed to submit the proposal accordingly within six weeks.
16. To be listed after the receipt of the report.
IAs Nos. 122-23
17. The applicant is not present. Adjourned.
IAs Nos. 128-29
18. The construction of Adwa-Meja Link Canal was approved by the National Board for Wildlife subject to certain conditions. The main condition being the shifting of 10 villages. The State had agreed to rehabilitate the people of the said 10 villages, but now it is stated by the State that it is not feasible and the project could be implemented even without the shifting of the villages. Therefore, the matter should again go to NBWL for exploring the feasibility of the proposal.
19. NBWL to examine the matter and give its report within a period of six weeks.
IAs Nos. 130-31
20. As regards Dhauladhar Wildlife Sanctuary, the applicant has not submitted its proposal in the prescribed format to the State. The applicant may send its proposal in the prescribed format to the State and the State in turn may send the same to MoEF. MoEF may consider the same within a period of six weeks.
21. List after the receipt of the report of MoEF.
IA No. 133
22. Adjourned.
Court Masters
Alert