LALITH SWETHA
3rd Year LAW
SASTRA UNIVERSITY
IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, 2024
PETITIONER – T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD
V.
RESPONDENT – UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
CITATION – I.A. NO.20650 OF 2023
DATE OF JUDGEMENT – 6 March, 2024
HON’BLE JUDGES – Before Prashant Kumar and B R Gavai
INTRODUCTION
The interconnectedness of tigers and forests illustrates the profound role apex predators play in sustaining ecosystems. An age-old saying from the Mahabharata beautifully encapsulates this relationship: “The tiger perishes without the forest, and the forest perishes without its tigers.” The survival of one is entwined with the other, creating a delicate balance in which the tiger symbolizes the peak of the ecological hierarchy. Protecting tiger habitats is not only crucial for the species itself but also for the diverse flora and fauna that depend on a healthy ecosystem.
In India, despite numerous legislative protections, tiger habitats like the renowned Corbett Tiger Reserve face threats from human encroachment and exploitation, showcasing the pressing need for conservation efforts. The ecological significance of apex predators has been further evidenced through the transformative restoration efforts at Yellowstone National Park in the United States. In the early 20th century, the removal of wolves led to a surge in herbivore populations, resulting in overgrazing, soil erosion, and declining biodiversity. However, the reintroduction of wolves in 1995 initiated a remarkable ecological rebound. Wolves not only controlled the deer population but also altered their behavior, which allowed vegetation to recover, stabilized riverbanks, and invited a cascade of species back into the ecosystem.
These examples highlight the irreplaceable role that apex predators, like tigers and wolves, play in ecosystem restoration and stability. The success of Yellowstone serves as an inspiring reminder of the potential impact of tiger conservation in India’s iconic forests, emphasising the urgency of preserving such habitats.
Facts of the Case
Mr. Gaurav Kumar Bansal intervened in the present proceedings to raise concerns regarding unauthorized construction activities within the Corbett Tiger Reserve, particularly within the critical tiger breeding areas. He alleged that structures such as bridges and walls were being built without necessary approvals from relevant authorities, potentially harming the area’s rich biodiversity and ecological balance. Mr. Bansal appealed to the court to halt these constructions to preserve the park’s unique flora, fauna, and ecological value.
Responding to the issue, the Delhi High Court recognized the significance of the allegations and directed the authorities to treat Mr. Bansal’s concerns as a formal representation. The Court instructed the concerned officials to investigate the claims under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and, if validated, to take appropriate action in line with conservation laws to safeguard the national park’s ecosystem.
Subsequently, the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital took suo motu cognizance following a news report highlighting unauthorized developments within the Corbett Tiger Reserve. A team from the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), tasked with surveying the area, reported instances of illegal construction of roads, bridges, and buildings, alongside extensive tree felling. These activities were observed in key zones such as Morghatti and Pakhrau and were noted to contravene multiple environmental statutes, including the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
The NTCA recommended the immediate demolition of these unauthorized constructions and suggested eco-restoration efforts to mitigate the environmental damage. However, no decisive action was taken in response to these recommendations. This prompted the Uttarakhand High Court to issue formal notices to relevant parties, including government officials, to ensure compliance with conservation laws. It further directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and other state officials to inspect the affected areas, identify those responsible, and report on the actions taken to address the illegal constructions.
During this period, Mr. Bansal approached the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), flagging specific environmental violations within the reserve. He reported instances of illegal tree felling in the Gujjar Sot area, purportedly for establishing a Tiger Safari, and highlighted unauthorized construction activities that included new buildings and waterbodies. He alleged that these developments in buffer areas, particularly around key forest rest houses like Pakhrau and Morghatti, were severely damaging the Corbett landscape’s ecological and biological integrity. The unauthorized actions, according to Mr. Bansal, posed an irreversible threat to the park’s biodiversity, potentially affecting the delicate balance of its flora, fauna, and overall ecology.
Issues
- Whether tiger safaris and zoos operate under the same legal framework and regulatory guidelines concerning wildlife conservation, animal welfare, and environmental protection?
- Whether the establishment of a tiger safari at Pakhrau adheres to applicable laws and regulations?
- Whether the construction activities and tree felling within the Corbett Tiger Reserve were conducted without the necessary approvals, thereby violating statutory environmental protections and conservation laws?
Arguments for Petition
The petitioner, argues that multiple illegal constructions were carried out within Corbett National Park in violation of statutory environmental protections. He claims that these actions not only breached legal protocols but also led to significant ecological damage, including unauthorized deforestation, to facilitate these illegal developments. The petitioner stresses that such violations undermine the sanctuary’s purpose of wildlife conservation and demands strict accountability for the actions of officials responsible for the unauthorized constructions and the alleged illegal felling of trees.
Arguments for Respondent
The respondents, contend that steps have been taken to address the unauthorized construction activities, including the demolition of illegal structures and removal of debris. They assert that these constructions were conducted by local forest officials without the approval of higher authorities and that disciplinary actions have been initiated against the responsible officials. They further argue that the establishment of the ‘Tiger Safari’ was executed with appropriate clearances and approvals from competent authorities, aligning with the legal requirements at the time. Additionally, they dispute the Forest Survey of India (FSI) report on tree felling, asserting that the figures are exaggerated and based on unreliable methodology. The respondents emphasize that the Safari project occupies a minimal portion of the park’s buffer zone and contends that it is unlikely to interfere with wildlife corridors.
Court’s Reasoning
In its judgment, the Supreme Court provided comprehensive reasoning regarding the establishment of Tiger Safaris and the protection of the Corbett Tiger Reserve, underscoring the importance of wildlife conservation and environmental laws. The Court clarified that Tiger Safaris are primarily intended for the rehabilitation of tigers that cannot be rewilded and that the management of such safaris falls under the jurisdiction of the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), rather than the Central Zoo Authority (CZA). It emphasized that any guidelines governing Tiger Safaris must align with the overarching objectives of wildlife conservation, ensuring that these initiatives positively contribute to the preservation of tigers and their natural habitats.
The Court deemed the establishment of the Tiger Safari at Pakhrau to be legal, as it was consistent with the approved Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP), which included provisions for a Rescue Centre-cum-Tiger Safari. Although the formal committee responsible for determining the site location according to the 2016 Guidelines had not been constituted, the project had previously obtained necessary approvals from both the NTCA and the CZA. The Court acknowledged the substantial progress made in the safari’s construction, noting that 80% of the work was complete and emphasizing the urgency of rehabilitating tigers awaiting treatment. Furthermore, it directed that a rescue center be relocated closer to the safari to enhance operational efficiency, while strictly adhering to the 2016 Guidelines during construction. This decision aims to balance ecological integrity with public interest by supporting conservation efforts and establishing a tourist attraction.
In addressing illegal construction activities and unauthorized tree felling within the Corbett Tiger Reserve, the Supreme Court highlighted the Reserve’s critical role as a habitat for tigers. The Court stated that these illegal activities violated environmental laws, including the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980. It reaffirmed the responsibility of the government and its agencies to protect the ecological integrity of the Reserve and mandated strict actions against those involved in violations. To this end, the Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct a thorough investigation into these irregularities and stressed the necessity for regulatory measures to prevent further illegal constructions, thereby reinforcing the imperative of safeguarding wildlife and upholding environmental laws.
Additionally, the Supreme Court emphasises the fundamental significance of the Public Trust Doctrine in preserving environmental resources for the benefit of the public. The Court reiterated that the government holds certain natural resources—such as air, water, forests, and coastlines—in trust for the people, ensuring these resources remain available for public use and are not subject to private ownership or commercial exploitation. It invoked historical precedents from both Roman and English law that recognize the vital importance of certain lands for public welfare, emphasizing that governmental actions that impair public access or benefit from these resources require rigorous scrutiny. The judgment stressed the need for a legal framework that aligns with ecological principles, ensuring that human activities respect the inherent limitations of the environment and protect public interest against the encroachments of private interests.
Through this comprehensive analysis, the Supreme Court sought to ensure that the development of Tiger Safaris and the protection of wildlife are harmonized, addressing both conservation needs and the demands of tourism while safeguarding the ecological balance.
Precedent analysis
In the context of the ongoing proceedings related to environmental violations within the Corbett Tiger Reserve, the principles established in landmark cases such as Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India [1]and S. Jagannath v. Union of India [2]are highly relevant. These precedents underscore the necessity of holding polluters accountable through the doctrine of environmental restitution and the “Polluter Pays Principle.”
In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action, the Supreme Court highlighted the Central Government’s authority under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, to take necessary measures to protect and improve environmental quality. It emphasized that the government is not only empowered to mandate remedial measures but also to recover associated costs from those responsible for environmental harm. This principle directly applies to the current case, where the state must take action against the parties responsible for the illegal activities that have led to significant ecological damage within the Corbett Tiger Reserve.
Similarly, in S. Jagannath, the Court ruled that industries causing pollution bear absolute liability for the harm they inflict on the environment and must undertake necessary measures for remediation. This ruling reinforces the need for accountability for environmental degradation within the Corbett Reserve, compelling the offending parties to restore affected ecosystems and pay for the costs associated with restoration efforts.
These precedents collectively advocate for a robust framework where the restoration of damaged ecosystems, such as that of the Corbett Tiger Reserve, is prioritized. They assert the necessity for active restoration measures tailored to the specific ecosystem impacted, emphasizing that remedial efforts should be as localized and similar to the original environment as possible. This approach not only aligns with established legal principles but also serves the broader objective of sustainable development and conservation of biodiversity, particularly for keystone species like tigers. Consequently, the Court must invoke these precedents to ensure that responsible parties are held accountable for their actions, thereby fostering a more comprehensive and effective response to the environmental challenges facing the Corbett Tiger Reserve.
Judgement
The Court recognizes the significant environmental destruction within Corbett Tiger Reserve and emphasizes the dual responsibility of both identifying those accountable and restoring the affected ecosystem. While the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is tasked with identifying the culprits behind the extensive damage, the Court asserts that the State of Uttarakhand bears immediate responsibility for environmental restoration. The Court mandates that the State assess the value of the environmental damage, initiate the recovery of costs from those found responsible, and implement active restoration efforts. Existing Tiger Safaris, including the one at Pakhrau, are permitted to remain operational; however, the State is directed to establish a nearby rescue center to support conservation efforts.
Further, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) is instructed to form a committee to assess environmental damages, recommend appropriate restoration measures, and identify responsible individuals. The Committee is to provide guidance on eco-friendly tourism, specifying permissible activities, types of construction, and restrictions in buffer zones. It will also define noise restrictions around protected forest boundaries and recommend strategies for the effective management of Tiger Reserves on a national level. The Court orders that the funds recovered from responsible parties be exclusively allocated to restoring ecological damage.
Additionally, the Court directs the CBI to submit an investigative report within three months, following the Uttarakhand High Court’s previous mandate. A status report on the disciplinary proceedings against delinquent officers is also expected from the State within three months, with a completion deadline of six months. These proceedings will remain active, allowing the Court to oversee both restoration efforts and the investigation’s progress. The Court will issue further directions upon receiving the Committee’s preliminary report, expected within three months.
Analysis
The Supreme Court’s judgment regarding the Corbett Tiger Reserve underscores the critical intersection of wildlife conservation and environmental protection in India. By recognizing the integral role of apex predators like tigers in maintaining ecological balance, the Court highlights the necessity of safeguarding their habitats against illegal encroachments and construction activities. The ruling acknowledges the significance of the Public Trust Doctrine, reaffirming that natural resources are held in trust for public benefit and must be protected from exploitation.
Central to the Court’s decision is the establishment of a regulatory framework that aligns the management of Tiger Safaris with conservation objectives. The judgment articulates that while the establishment of such safaris can be legally permissible, it must not undermine the ecological integrity of protected areas. The directive for the formation of a committee to assess environmental damages and recommend restoration measures reflects a proactive approach to remediation, ensuring accountability for ecological harm.
Moreover, the Court’s emphasis on utilizing precedents such as the “Polluter Pays Principle” signifies a commitment to enforce strict liability on those causing environmental degradation. This reinforces the idea that responsible parties must not only restore ecosystems but also contribute financially to remediation efforts, thereby fostering a culture of environmental responsibility.
Overall, the judgment serves as a pivotal reminder of the judiciary’s role in upholding environmental laws while balancing conservation efforts with developmental needs. It calls for a collaborative approach involving government agencies, conservation authorities, and the public to ensure the long-term sustainability of vital ecosystems like the Corbett Tiger Reserve, emphasizing that the health of such environments is inextricably linked to broader ecological and societal well-being.
Conclusion
The presence of tigers in a forest symbolizes the health of the ecosystem, as their survival is intricately linked to the well-being of the habitat that supports them. Although statistics suggest progress, with reports of reduced poaching and increased tiger populations across the country, these numbers alone do not guarantee the long-term safety of tigers or their habitats. Significant ecological threats persist, as demonstrated by cases of illegal construction and large-scale tree felling, notably within Corbett National Park, where violations have caused substantial environmental damage.
Such incidents underline the need for stringent, proactive safeguards to prevent similar environmental degradation in the future. Without robust intervention, activities that compromise forest integrity will continue to jeopardize the habitat necessary for tigers and other species, disrupting the natural balance. Protecting tigers goes beyond conserving a single species—it involves upholding the health of entire ecosystems that are vital for biodiversity, climate resilience, and human welfare. Therefore, it is essential to reinforce and monitor conservation measures rigorously, address ecological threats, and strengthen enforcement mechanisms. Only through such comprehensive efforts can the goal of preserving both the tiger population and their natural habitats truly be achieved, securing the future of the ecosystem as a whole.
Reference
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/129789971/
[1] 1996 AIR 1446
[2] 1997 AIR SC 811
