9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1517X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... width of 1 kilometre ESZ ought to be maintained in respect of the protected forests, which forms part of the recommendations of the CEC in relation to Category B protected forests. This would be the standard formula, subject to changes in special circumstances. The CEC s recommendation is considered that the ESZ should be relatable to the area covered by a protected forest but the Standing Committee s view that the area of a protected forest may not always be a reasonable criteria also merits consideration. It was argued that the 1 km wide no development zone may not be feasible in all cases and specific instances were given for Sanjay Gandhi National Park and Guindy National Park in Mumbai and Chennai metropolis respectively which have urban activities in very close proximity. These sanctuaries shall form special cases. In the given facts concerning the Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary, the margin of 25 metres as contemplated in the 1994 Mineral Policy of the State of Rajasthan is grossly inadequate. Jamua Ramgarh sanctuary is treated as a special case for fixing the ESZ as in the past, the buffer zone varied from 25 metres to 100 metres. ESZ of 500 metres would be a reasonable buffer zone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, AOR, Mr. C. L. Sahu, AOR, Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR, Mr. S. R. Setia, AOR, Mr. Rajat Joseph, AOR, Mrs. Nandini Gore, AOR, M/S. M. V. Kini Associates, AOR, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Bakshi, AOR, Ms. Divya Roy, AOR, Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR, Ms. Charu Mathur, AOR, Mr. T. V. George, AOR, Mr. Neeraj Shekhar, AOR, Mr. E. M. S. Anam, AOR, Ms. S. Janani, AOR, Mr. Surya Kant, AOR, Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR, Mrs. Bina Gupta, AOR, M/S. K J John And Co, AOR, Mr. S. C. Birla, AOR, Ms. K. V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, AOR, Mr. Punit Dutt Tyagi, AOR, Mr. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, AOR, Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR, Mr. Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, AOR, Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Adv., Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR, Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR, Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR, Mrs. M. Qamaruddin, AOR, Ms. Baby Krishnan, AOR, Mr. B V Deepak, AOR, Mr. Sudhir Kumar Gupta, AOR, Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR, Mr. Rauf Rahim, AOR, Mr. Rajeev Singh, AOR, Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR, Mr. Shiva Pujan Singh, AOR, Mr. K. V. Vijayakumar, AOR, Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR, Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv., Mr. S.K. Rajora, Adv., Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv., Mr. Vivek Sharma, Adv., Ms. Meenakshi Kamble, Adv., Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR, Mrs. Rek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR, Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, AOR, Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR,, Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sarojanand Jha, Adv., Mr. Karan Sharma, Adv., Ms. Precheta Kar, Adv., Mr. Aditya Sidhra, Adv., Mr. Nadeem Afroz, Adv., MR. M. R. Shamshad, AOR, Ms. Shalini Kaul, AOR, Mr. V.K. Shukla, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Adv., Mr. Ashiwan Mishra, Adv., Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR, Mr. S. Gowthaman, AOR, Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, AOR, Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR, Mr. P. S. Sudheer, AOR, Mr. D.K. Garg, AOR, Mr. Dinesh K. Garg, Adv., Mr. Dhananjay Garg, Adv., Mr. Abhishek Garg, Adv., Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AOR, Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR, Dr. Monika Gusain, AOR, Mr. Harim Om Yaduvanshi, Adv., Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR, Ms. Anu K. Joy, Adv., Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv, Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR, Mr. Gopal Balwant Sathe, AOR, Mr. Naveen Kumar, AOR, Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Adv., Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR, Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, Adv., Mr. Prashant Tyagi, Adv., Mr. P. Srinivas Reddy, Adv., M/s. Venkat Palwai Law Associates, AOR, Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR Maharashtra : Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR., Mr.Rahul Chitnis, Adv., Mr.Aaditya A. Pande, Adv., Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv., Ms. Shwetal Shepal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... life sanctuary in the State of Rajasthan known as Jamua Ramgarh (also spelt as Jamwa Ramgarh). The second set of issues is wider in scope, and involves prescribing eco sensitive zones (ESZ) surrounding the wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. The subject of mining and other commercial activities within the wildlife sanctuaries and national parks (protected forests) shall also be dealt by us in this order. The applications before us require examination in the perspective of a set of recommendations made by the CEC and we have been urged by a set of applicants to make certain modifications of this Court s earlier directions concerning steps to be taken for protection of forest resources. The applicants seeking modifications of our earlier orders include a set of miners, and, in some cases, the State Governments asking for opening up of the protected forest areas and their buffer zones, on which restrictions have been placed in by our earlier orders, for commercial exploitation. There is dispute as to what would constitute the buffer zones on ESZ in respect of national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, as there are divergence of views among the various stakeholders. 2. The present s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fixed as 500 meter. (iii) reclamation and rehabilitation of the area mined inside the sanctuary should be carried out in a time bound manner at the cost of the user agency for which a detailed reclamation and rehabilitation plan along with various items of work, cost involved and time frame should be prepared and implemented on priority basis. The plan presently prepared by the State Government is totally in adequate. It does not provide for reclamation and rehabilitation of the mining pits at all. No provision for removal of stones and rocks scattered in the sanctuary has been made. Intensive plantations and protection has not been provided. The revised plan should incorporate the above and other necessary measures to provide a congenial habitat for wild life. In the event adequate funds for this purpose cannot be recovered from the erstwhile mine lease owners, the same should be made available by the State Government; (iv) mining around the sanctuary should be allowed to restart only after a fool proof mechanism is put in place to ensure recovery of funds for implementation of reclamation and rehabilitation plan by the State Government; (v) exemplary compensation equivalent to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court may have to consider passing orders for implementation of the decision that was taken on 21 1 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 States/Union Territories now fail to respond, they would do so at their own risk and peril . 5. Two writ petitions have been instituted titled as Goa Foundation v. Union of India [W.P. (Civil) No. 460 of 2004] and Goa Foundation v. Union of India and Others [W.P. (Civil) No. 435 of 2012], in relation enforcement of various circulars issued for enforcement of environmental laws and to prevent illegal mining in different States including the State of Goa. There are certain overlapping issues involved in the present writ petition and the cases of Goa Foundation (supra). The directions which we propose to issue in this judgment/order shall take into account the orders passed in the cases of Goa Foundation (supra) and such directions shall be supplemental to the orders passed in any of the aforesaid two writ petitions if our directions pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... activities around National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary so as to minimize the negative impacts of such activities on the fragile ecosystem encompassing the Protected Area. As a first step towards achieving this goal, it is a pre requisite that an inventory of the different land use patterns and the different types of activities, types and number of industries operating around each of the Protected Area (National Parks, Sanctuaries) as well as important Corridors be made. The inventory could be done by the concerned Range Officers, who can take a stock of activities within 10 km of his range. 6.2 For the above purpose, a small committee comprising the concerned Wildlife Warden, an Ecologist, an official from the Local Self Government and an official of the Revenue Department of the concerned area, could be formed. The said committee could suggest the: (i) Extent of eco sensitive zones for the Protected Area being considered. (ii) The requirement of such a zone to act as a shock absorber. (iii) To suggest the best methods for management of the eco sensitive zones, so suggested. (iv) To suggest broad based thematic activities to be included in the Master Plan for the region. 6.3 Based ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lid waste in natural water bodies or terrestrial areas have been proposed to be made prohibited activities. Certain other activities having lesser environment damaging potential have been proposed to be regulated. 9. By an order passed on 4th August 2006, this Court had, inter alia, restrained grant of temporary working permits for mining within safety zones around any national park/wildlife sanctuary declared under Sections 18, 26 A or 35 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. As an interim measure, direction was issued to maintain one kilometre safety zone, which was subject to the orders that may be made in the present IA (I.A. No. 1000 of 2003). 10. The second report of the CEC dated 20th September 2012 makes the following recommendations as regards identification and declaration of ESZ. This report entitled Note regarding safety zones (Eco sensitive zones) around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries makes the following recommendations: 10. After considering that during the last ten years no significant progress has been made regarding identification and declaration of Safety Zones around protected areas and considering the matter in its totality, an implementable scheme h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fall in Category A; and vii) Sariska National Park (273 sq. km.) and Sariska Sanctuary (219 sq. km.) total area is 492 sq. km. and therefore both will fall in Category B; 13. The Safety Zone, in respect of protected areas falling in 'Category A and Category B, may comprise of all the areas including non forest areas falling within a distance of two kilometers and one kilometer respectively from the boundaries of the protected area. Such distances, in respect of protected areas falling within Category C and Category D, may be kept at 500 meter and 100 meter respectively. 14. The grant/renewal of mining leases (excluding for collection of boulders, gravel and sand from river beds), setting up of hazardous industries, brick kilns, wood based industries (except MDF/Particle Boards Plants) will be treated as prohibited activities within the Safety Zone (eco sensitive zones). The activities such as setting up of industries (other than those included in the list of prohibited activities), hotels and restaurants including resorts, commercial helicopter services, hydel projects, irrigations projects, canals, laying of transmission lines and distribution lines above 33 KV, roads of more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Fragile Area, amended 1999; iv) S.O.319(E), (7/5/1992) Restricting certain activities causing environmental degradation at Aravalli Range; v) S.O. 481 (E), (5/7/1996) No Development Zone at Numaligarh, East of Kaziranga; vi) S.O. 884(E), (19/12/1996) Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Authority, 1996, amended 2001 ; vii) S.O. 350(E), (13/5/1998) Order constituting the Taj Trapezium Zone Pollution (Prevent and Control) Authority; viii) S.0. 825(E), (17.9.1998) Pachmarhi Region as an EcoSensitive Zone; ix) S.O. 52(E), (17/1/2001) Mahabaleswar Panchgani Region as an Eco Sensitive Zone; x) S.O. 133 (E), (4/2/2003) Matheran and surrounding region as an Eco Sensitive Zone 1. S.O. 83 (E), (16/01/2004) Amendments to S.O. 133(E) dated 4/2/2003; xi) S.0. 1545(E), (25/06/2009), Mount Abu as EcoSensitive Zone. xii) S.0. 1260(E), (31/05/2012) Girnar Reserve Forest as Eco Sensitive Zone. 18. It is respectfully submitted that the above proposals are submitted in the back drop of inordinate delay that has taken place in the identification and declaration of Safety Zones around National Parks/ Wildlife Sanctuaries and so as to ensure that the process of such declarations do not remain pending ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... FC Act after considering the gravity of the violation. However, the grant of a TWP may be considered where past violations have been regularised by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (for short MoEF ) by the grant of an approval under the FC Act with retrospective effect; (v) The conditions attached to the approval under the FC Act for the grant of the mining lease (or the renewal of the mining lease) have been fulfilled, particularly those in respect of (but not limited to) compensatory afforestation, reclamation plan and overburden dumping on the specified site; (vi) The user agency has, within the stipulated time, already filed a proposal in conformity with the Forest (Conservation) Rules, 1980 for seeking an approval under the FC Act along with the complete details as are required to be furnished. An application for the grant of TWP in favour of the user agencies, who have either not filed a proper proposal and/or have not provided complete information, particularly in respect of (but not limited to) compensatory afforestation, phased reclamation plan, felling of trees, details of minerals extracted in the past, etc. should not be entertained; (vii) A TWP shall be granted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ality of the letter dated 30th May 2003 issued by the Mining Engineer Jaipur, office of Mining Engineer Geology Department, Jaipur, Rajasthan stopping mining operation in the disputed area of Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and pending completion of demarcation. (iii)In I.A. Nos. 1210 1211 of 2004, the applicant is Madhu Agarwal. Her prayer is for fresh demarcation of the Pillar no.1 to Pillar no.428 around the said sanctuary and she has also sought directions on the State Government to release the excess land from the reserve forest area after fresh demarcation. The applicant in this case has been involved in mining of dolomite in Jamua Ramgarh Tehsil in the area known as Rayanwala of Digota Forest Block 61. (iv) I.A. Nos. 1250 1251 of 2004 has been taken out by Bhushan Sharma, successor in interest of one Sharda Devi, who was the original allottee of mining around the Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary. It is the case of the applicant that his operations have been stopped by letter dated 30th May 2003 issued by the Mining Engineer Jaipur, office of Mining Engineer Geology Department, Jaipur, Rajasthan in the disputed area of Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary. Survey had revealed that mining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate of Maharashtra, and, inter alia, concerned 64 saw mills. That application was disposed of with a direction for consideration of their cases within a period of two months and if they were found eligible, their applications were directed to be sent to the CEC. The latter was to submit a report and the State of Maharashtra was directed to abide by the aforesaid recommendations. (i) In I.A. No. 1412 of 2005, the applicants are Maharashtra Timber Laghu Udyog Mahasangha alongwith the Poona Timber Merchant (owners of saw mills in the State of Maharashtra). They want clarification of the order of this Court passed in I.A. No. 887 of 2003 for consideration of the cases of 64 saw mill owners for grant for grant of license as per notification dated 16th July 1981 issued by the State of Maharashtra amending the Bombay Forest Rules, 1942. This Court had directed in the aforesaid order (of 14th July 2003) that the cases of the applicants may be examined by the State Government within a period of two months and if they are found eligible, their applications could be sent to the CEC who might submit a report to this Court. In the present application the applicants want grant of license conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of the same sanctuary is by an association of real estate developers, CREDAI MCHI registered as I.A. No. 65571 of 2021. The main prayer in I.A. No. 65571 of 2021 is: (a) Modify the order dated 11.12.2018 passed by this Hon ble Court in I.A. No. 1000 in W.P. (C) No. 202 of 1995 inasmuch as it relates to the Thane Creek Flamingo Sanctuary and direct that the Eco Sensitive Zone around the said Sanctuary shall be in terms of the proposal dated 10.03.2021 submitted by the State Government and the Draft Notification dated 08.04.2021 published by the Ministry of Environment Forests, Government of India; and / or (b) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (quoted verbatim from paperbook) 17. The order on 11th December 2018 was passed by this Court as the proposals in respect of 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries had not yet been received by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. Recommendations of CEC as regards maintaining ESZ were made in relation to wildlife sanctuaries and national parks on 20th September 2012. As per the order passed on 11th December 2018, the proposal of the State Governme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mining leases granted and operated by them. In the CEC report which has been transformed into I.A. No. 1000 of 2003, it has been recorded that they were granted mining leases in violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 as well as the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. They had continued working on the temporary permits after the order of this Court dated 12th December 1996. In the Order of this Court reported in [(1997) 2 SCC 267] it has been inter alia observed: 4. The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was enacted with a view to check further deforestation which ultimately results in ecological imbalance; and therefore, the provisions made therein for the conservation of forests and for matters connected therewith, must apply to all forests irrespective of the nature of ownership or classification thereof. The word forest must be understood according to its dictionary meaning. This description covers all statutorily recognised forests, whether designated as reserved, protected or otherwise for the purpose of Section 2(i) of the Forest Conservation Act. The term forest land , occurring in Section 2, will not only include forest as understood in the dictionary sense, but also an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been deleted from the lease document and they seek to operate two quarries, on non forest land beyond the safety zone of 25 metres, which has been specified as part of the Mineral Policy, 1994 of the State of Rajasthan. They also, in effect, seek resumption of mining activities in the area beyond 25 metres from the forest boundary. 22. As regards the Guidelines of 9th February 2011, which has been referred to in the affidavit of MoEF CC affirmed/verified by Dr. Subrata Bose, Scientist F Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India, stand of M/s. Andhi Marbles Pvt. Ltd. is that no consensus has been reached as regards notifying the areas within 10 kilometres of the boundaries of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries as ESZ. 23. In the affidavit filed on behalf of MoEF CC, which we have referred to in the preceding paragraph, it has been stated that the Guidelines for Declaration of ESZ have been notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India. For the purpose of formulation of ESZ in relation of individual protected forest area, Para 6 of the said Guidelines has been brought to our notice. A detailed hierarchy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest areas within 100 metres of the Jamua Ramgarh sanctuary has been closed. Their plea is for allowing mining activity in non forest areas within protected forests and beyond the ESZ of 100 metres for economic activities, in the interest of local population as also the State s economy. 27. It has also been highlighted by the State that 25 sanctuaries, 2 national parks have been declared by the State comprising of a total area of 9,07,070 hectares and an area of 23,29,659 hectares of area as forest area or deemed forest is already existing as eco sensitive/eco fragile/buffer/safety zones in that State within which no non forest activities is allowed without proper permission under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The State of Rajasthan has opposed the proposal for declaring 10 kilometres beyond the boundary of sanctuaries and national parks being declared as ESZ. 28. The role of the State cannot be confined to that of a facilitator or generator of economic activities for immediate upliftment of the fortunes of the State. The State also has to act as a trustee for the benefit of the general public in relation to the natural resources so that sustainable development can be achiev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be site specific. Our attention has been drawn to the Comprehensive Guidelines formulated, to which we have referred earlier in this Order. In the case of Goa Foundation v. Union of India and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 590], the order passed in this proceeding [IA 1000 of 2003] on 4th August 2006 has also been referred to and relied upon. Affidavits have been filed by the State of Goa affirmed on 19th September 2012 and 31st October 2012. Main concern of the State of Goa is over creation of ESZ of 10 kilometres from the boundaries of protected forests as buffer zone and it is also contended on their behalf that such buffer zones should be site specific. It is highlighted that in the State of Goa vegetative aerial cover of Goa is more than 59.99% (as per the Indian State Forest Report of 2011) and protected forest areas constitute over 20% of the total geographic area. On this basis, they seek appropriate directions. It has also been brought to our notice that notifications have been issued in respect of several sanctuaries stipulating the ESZ boundaries. Written submissions have also been filed by Goa Foundation [the petitioners in W.P. (C) 460/2004] and W.P. (C) 435/2012 in which it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... master plan, which takes care of habitats allowing no restriction on movement of wild animals. (v) Erection of electrical cables with stress on promoting underground cabling. (vi) Fencing of premises of hotels and lodges. (vii) Use of polythene bags by shopkeepers. (viii) Widening of roads with proper environmental impact assessment. (ix) Movement of vehicular traffic at night for commercial purposes. (x) Introduction of exotic species. (xi) Protection of hill slopes and river banks. (xii) Regulation of any form of air and vehicular pollution. (xiii) Putting up of sign boards and hoardings. Within permissible activities fall: (i) Ongoing agricultural and horticulture practices by local communities. (ii) Rain water harvesting (iii) Organic farming (iv) Use of renewable energy sources (v) Adoption of green technology for all activities. 33. In the affidavit of the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife, the views of the non official members of the Standing Committee have been placed on record, which essentially contemplates continuation of the 10 kilometres buffer zone. Order passed by this Court on 4th December 2006 in the case of Goa Foundation (W.P. (C) 460/2004) propose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d implement a coherent and coordinated programme to meet its obligation of sustainable development based on intergenerational equity. While economic development should not be allowed to take place at the cost of ecology or by causing widespread environment destruction and violation; at the same time, the necessity to preserve ecology and environment should not hamper economic and other developments. Both development and environment must go hand in hand, in other words, there should not be development at the cost of environment and vice versa, but there should be development while taking due care and ensuring the protection of environment. 16. In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, this Court held that the Precautionary Principle is an essential feature of the principle of Sustainable Development . It went on to explain the precautionary principle in the following terms: (i) Environmental measures by the State Government and the statutory authorities must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation. (ii) Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cember 2004 and such a stand appears to have had been taken from the Mineral Policy of 1994. It, however, appears that a new Mineral Policy had been adopted by the State of Rajasthan in 2015. 37. There are also pleas for permitting some of the miners to continue mining activities within 25 metre zone conceived by the State of Rajasthan as Buffer Zone. In three applications, I.A. Nos. 1123 1124 of 2004, I.A.Nos.1197 1199 of 2004 and I.A.Nos.1210 1211 of 2004, M/s. Jaipur Mineral Development Syndicate Pvt. Ltd., Federation of Mining Association of Rajasthan and Smt. Madhu Agarwal have taken a point that there was improper declaration of Jamua Ramgarh as a sanctuary. The notification made under Section 18 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 bearing No. F.11(19) Raj. 8/81 Jaipur dated 31st May 1982 has been annexed to the I.A. Nos. 982 984 of 2003 the applicant therein, being Magan Devi Meena. Initially, there was declaration of the said sanctuary as reserved forest under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953. Thereafter, the notification of 31st May 1982 came into operation under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. 38. In I.A. No. 1000 of 2003, it has been disclosed that the settlement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this order on the basis that Jamua Ramgarh is a subsisting sanctuary. 40. We have already indicated that CEC in I.A. No. 1000 of 2003 has given a dreadful account of the condition of the sanctuary, ravaged by mining activities. CEC in the same document has also outlined the importance of the said sanctuary. These would appear from paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said I.A which read: 4. In stark contrast to the above during the site visits to the Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary the CEC came across a horrible and unbelievable picture of devastated eco system due to indiscriminate mining activity in blatant violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, Wild Life (Protection) Act and even this Hon'ble Court's orders. The sanctuary is littered with hundreds of deep mining pits, randomly scattered over burdens , scores of cranes and mined boulders and stones scattered all over the place. It is rare to see such a destruction even in a non forest area, least of all inside a sanctuary. It is a horror story that has to be seen to be believed. This is a site where all the laws and conventions that govern the natural world have been violated for commercial gains. Instead of being managed as a wild lif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and institutions in that regard. In substance the view of the Committee is that there should not be uniform ESZ. We have also referred to the Guidelines dated 9th February 2011 which gives a detailed procedure for evolving ESZ and identification of activities that could be carried on in such zones. The order of this Court in the case of Goa Foundation [W.P. (C) No. 460 of 2004] passed on 4th December 2006 also contemplated issue of direction for maintaining a 10 kilometre wide safety zone from the boundaries in respect of sanctuaries and national parks as there was lack of response from the States and Union territories in relation to queries on various aspects in respect of wildlife conservation. The proposal for having an ESZ of 10 kms from the boundaries of the national parks and wildlife sanctuaries was originally mooted on 21st January 2002 in the meeting of the Indian Board for Wildlife, as it appears from the order passed by this Court in the case of Goa Foundation [W.P. (C) No. 460 of 2004] on 30th January 2006. We have to collate the views of these experts bodies including the CEC, who have been assisting this Court through the different stages of this litigation. 42. In ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kilometre measured from the demarcated boundary of such protected forest in which the activities proscribed and prescribed in the Guidelines of 9th February 2011 shall be strictly adhered to. For Jamua Ramgarh wildlife sanctuary, it shall be 500 metres so far as subsisting activities are concerned. (b) In the event, however, the ESZ is already prescribed as per law that goes beyond one kilometre buffer zone, the wider margin as ESZ shall prevail. If such wider buffer zone beyond one kilometre is proposed under any statutory instrument for a particular national park or wildlife sanctuary awaiting final decision in that regard, then till such final decision is taken, the ESZ covering the area beyond one kilometre as proposed shall be maintained. (c) The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests as also the Home Secretary of each State and Union Territory shall remain responsible for proper compliance of the said Guidelines as regards nature of use within the ESZ of all national parks and sanctuaries within a particular State or Union Territory. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests for each State and Union Territory shall also arrange to make a list of subsisting structures and ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the proposal of a State or Union Territory has not been given, the 10 kilometres buffer zone as ESZ, as indicated in the order passed by this Court on 4th December 2006 in the case of Goa Foundation (supra) and also contained in the Guidelines of 9th February 2011 shall be implemented. Within that area, the entire set of restrictions concerning an ESZ shall operate till a final decision in that regard is arrived at. (i) I.A. No. 1412 of 2005 and I.A.No.117831 of 2019 do not relate to the issues involved in I.A. No. 1000 of 2003. These applications may be placed before the appropriate Bench to be heard independently. (j) For the same reason, I.A. No. 1992 of 2007 shall also be dealt with independently by the appropriate Bench and no order is being passed concerning this application at this stage. (k) The application of the State of Rajasthan registered as I.A. No. 3880 of 2015 relates to clarification of an order passed in the case of Goa Foundation (W.P.(C) No. 460 of 2004). Let this application be placed before the Bench taking up the case of Goa Foundation. (l) I.A.No.96949 of 2019 and I.A.No.65571 of 2021 are disposed of with directions that the MoEF CC as also CEC shall procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
