TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1517
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in Kohli, Sr. Adv., Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR, Mr. Ankit Roy, Adv., Mr. Ishaan Borthakur, Adv., Ms. Nimisha Menon, Adv., Shri. Gaichangpou Gangmei, AOR, Mr. Raj Kishor Choudhary, AOR, Mr. Umesh Bhagwat, AOR, Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR, Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR, Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR, Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, AOR, Ms. C. K. Sucharita, AOR, Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, AOR, Mr. Ejaz Maqbool, AOR, M/S. Corporate Law Group, AOR, Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR, Mr. P. N. Gupta, AOR, Meghalaya Pollution Control Board : Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv., Ms. Chubalemla Chong, Adv. St. of Sikkim : Mr. Raghvendra Kumar, Adv., Mr. Anand Kr. Dubey, Adv., Ms. Rajlakshmi Singh, Adv., Mr. Nishant Verma, Adv., Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Adv., Simanta Kumar, Adv., Mr. Sunil Saraogi, Adv., Mr. Narendra Kumar, AOR State of A.P. : Mr. Mahfooz A. Nazki, AOR, Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Adv., Mr. Shaik Mohamad Haneef, Adv., Mr. T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Adv., Mr. K.V. Girish Chowdary, Adv., Ms. Rajeswari Mukherjee, Adv., Ms. Aruna Gupta, Adv., Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR For Arunachal Pradesh : Mr. Abhimanyu Tewari, AOR, Ms. Eliza Bar, Adv. West Bengal : Mr. Suhaan Mukerji, Adv., Mr. Nikhil Parikshith....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hhabra, Adv., Mr. Shiv Singh Yadav, Adv., Ms. Saifali Mitra, Adv., Mrs. Rani Chhabra, AOR, Mr. V. Balachandran, AOR, Mr. P. R. Ramasesh, AOR, Mr. Rajiv Mehta, AOR, Mr. Rathin Das, AOR, Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, AOR, Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR, Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR, Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR,, Mr. E.R. Kumar, Adv., Mr. Lalit Chauhan, Adv., Mr. Abhiram Naik, Adv., Ms. Nitika Pandey, Adv., for M/S Parekh and Co., AOR, Mr. H. S. Parihar, AOR, Ms. Bina Madhavan, AOR, Mr. T. N. Singh, AOR, Mr. A. N. Arora, AOR, Mr. G. Prakash, AOR, Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR, Mr. Sudarsh Menon, AOR, Mr. Vikrant Singh Bais, AOR, Mr. Rajesh Singh, AOR, Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR, Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha, AOR, Ms. Adarsh Nain, AOR, Ms. Ruchira Goel, AOR, Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR State of M.P. : Mr. Saurabh Mishra, AAG, Ms. Samridhi Jain, Adv., Mr. Sunny Choudhury, AOR, Ms. Seita Vaidyalingam, AOR, Mr. Siddhartha Jha, AOR, Mr. Nikhil Goel, AAG, Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR, Mr. P. K. Manohar, AOR, Mr. Nishanth Patil, AOR, Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR For State of Rajasthan : Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv.,, Mr. Arpit Parkash, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR, Mr. Balbir Singh, ASG, Mr. D.L.Chidananda Adv., Ms. Suhasini Sen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich is in the nature of a public interest litigation. It was instituted for protection of forest lands in the Nilgiris district of the State of Tamil Nadu. Subsequently, the scope of that writ petition was enlarged so as to protect such natural resources throughout the country. The original writ petitioner has since passed away (on 1st June 2016) but in an order passed on 3rd February 2017, this Court opined that being a public interest litigation, there was no requirement for bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner. The writ petition, in substance, continued with the cause title "in Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India & Ors". Various Orders have been passed from time to time in this writ petition to ensure preservation of forest resources of this country in balance with economic activities. By an Order of this Court dated 9th May 2002, a Central Empowered Committee ("CEC") was directed to be formed primarily for monitoring implementation of this Court's orders and to place the incidents of non­compliance before us. Subsequently, by a notification issued on 17th September 2002 by the Ministry of Environment and Forest in exercise o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses, after excluding the forest area and the safety zone are sanctioned by the competent authority and the conditions mentioned herein under are fully complied with; (ii) presently a safety zone of twenty five meter has been fixed for Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary and other sanctuaries in Rajasthan as against 500 meter for Ranthambhore National Park in Rajasthan itself. In Madhya Pradesh safety zone of 250 meter for all the 20 forest area has been fixed. The CEC is of the view that minimum 500 meter safety zone around National Parks and Sanctuaries is necessary where no mining, construction and other projects should be allowed. Without a reasonable safety zone the habitat and wild life in the National Parks and Sanctuaries are adversely affected. Although stringent conditions are imposed at the time of the sanction of the mining leases, none are practically complied with due to weak enforcement of the laws. The mining causes heavy disturbance in the area due to blasting, removal of over burden, chiseling, transportation, flying debris and movement of a large number of labourers and other persons. The safety zone of twenty five meter presently prescribed by the Rajasthan Forest D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erstwhile mine lease holders; (viii) no mining should be permitted adjoining the sanctuary till the boundary of the sanctuary is demarcated on the ground and the boundary pillars are verified with the fixed reference points; (ix) disciplinary action should be taken in a time bound manner against the erring officials in the Mines and the Forest Departments of the State of Rajasthan and the MoEF for allowing mining in violation of the F.C. Act, the W. P. Act and/or this Hon'ble Court's order;" (quoted verbatim from paperbook) 3. This Court had converted this report with its set of recommendations into an Interlocutory Application and was allocated registration number I.A. 1000 of 2003. 4. On 20th September 2012, a second report was submitted by the CEC. The recommendations made in the second report went beyond the Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary and dealt with creation of identification and declaration of safety zones around protected forests all across the country. The question of having ESZ around the protected forests was examined by this Court earlier in another Writ Petition [W.P. (Civil) No. 460 of 2004] in Goa Foundation v. Union of India.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hy; "3. Purpose for declaring Eco­Sensitive Zones: The purpose of declaring Eco­sensitive Zones around National Parks and Sanctuaries is to create some kind of "Shock Absorber" for the Protected Areas. They would also act as a transition zone from areas of high protection to areas involving lesser protection. As has been decided by the National Board for Wildlife, the activities in the Ecosensitive zones would be of a regulatory nature rather than prohibitive nature, unless and otherwise so required. 4. Extent of Eco­Sensitive Zones: 4.1 Many of the existing Protected Areas have already undergone tremendous development in close vicinity to their boundaries. Some of the Protected Areas actually lying in the urban setup (Eg. Guindy National Park, Tamil Nadu, Sanjay Gandhi National Park, Maharashtra, etc). Therefore, defining the extent of eco­sensitive zones around Protected Areas will have to be kept flexible and Protected Area specific. The width of the Eco­sensitive Zone and type of regulations will differ from Protected Area to Protected Area. However, as a general principle the width of the Eco­sensitive Zone could go u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, the same may be forwarded to the Ministry of Environment and Forests for further processing and notification. Here, it may be noted that, the State/ Union Territory Forest Department could forward the proposals to the respective authority in the State Government with copy to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, as and when the proposals (even if it is for single Protected Area) are complete. An indicative list of details that need to be submitted along with the proposals is at ANNEXURE­2. 6.5 It is to mention here that in cases where the boundary of a Protected Area abuts the boundary of another State/Union Territory where it does not form part of any Protected Area, it shall be the endeavour of both the State/ Union Territory Governments to have a mutual consultation and decide upon the width of the ecosensitive zone around the Protected Area in question. 6.6 The State Government should endeavour to convey a very strong message to the public that ESZ are not meant to hamper their day to day activities, but instead, is meant to protect the precious forests/Protected Areas in their locality from any negative impact, and also to refine the environment aro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fe Sanctuaries (hereinafter referred to as protected areas), the protected areas based on their areas, are classified into four categories: i) CATEGORY­A ­ the protected areas having an area of 500 sq. km. or more. The total number of such protected areas is 73 and their total area is about 1,01,389 sq. km (63.44 % of total area of protected areas); ii) CATEGORY­B ­ the protected areas having an area between 200 sq. km. to 500 sq. km. The total number of such protected areas is 115 and their total area is about 38942 sq. km. (24.37 % of total area of protected areas); iii) CATEGORY­C ­ the protected areas having an area between 100 sq. km. to 200 sq. km. The total number of such protected areas is 85 and their total area is about 12,066 sq. km (about 7.55 % of total area of protected areas); and iv) CATEGORY­D ­ the protected areas having an area up to 100 sq. km. The total number of such protected areas is 344 and their total area is about 7,422 sq. km (about 4.65 % of total area of all protected areas). 12. Wherever two or more protected areas are contiguous to each other, such protected areas will be pl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsmission lines and distribution lines above 33 KV, roads of more than five meter width and collection of boulders, gravel and sand from the river beds will be treated as regulated activities and which will be permissible only after obtaining environment clearance and clearance of the Standing Committee, National Board for Wildlife. All other activities which are not prescribed as prohibited activities or regulated activities will be treated as permissible activities. 15. The concerned State/UT will be at liberty to shift a protected area from a lower category to higher category (say from Category­C to Category­B) after considering the importance of the protected area on account of: i) presence of flagship species/endangered species such as Tiger, Lion, Elephant, Rhino, Snow Leopard, Red Panda, Hangul, Musk deer, Great Indian Bustard, Lion Tailed Macaque, floricans; ii) fragile eco­system such as Western Ghats, North Eastern States, areas having high altitude flora and fauna, rain forest, mangroves, marine eco­system; iii) World Heritage sites; and iv) Wetland eco­systems 16. The concerned State/UT Government....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Forest as Eco­Sensitive Zone. 18. It is respectfully submitted that the above proposals are submitted in the back­drop 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 indefinitely." (quoted verbatim from paperbook) 11. To the said report, another supplementary note dated 18th January 2013 has been submitted. This report is also in connection with notifying the ESZ around protected forests. The following passage from this report is relevant: ­ "4. After considering the inordinate delay which has already taken place in notifying the safety zone around National Parks/ Wildlife Sanctuaries and considering the ground situation as it exists, the CEC is of the considered view that it may be appropriate that an early decision is taken regarding the safety zones around National Park/ Sanctuaries. The proposal submitted by the CEC while ensuring that effective restrictions and regulations are put in place immediately and implemented in an objective manner also, after detailed examin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....king 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 only limited to working in the area broken up legally and during the validity of the lease. No TWP can be granted in respect of, or extending to either unbroken area or the areas which have been broken after the expiry of the mining lease or have been broken in violation of the FC Act or any other law for the time being in force; (viii) In no circumstances can the duration of a TWP extend beyond the period of one year. Where an application for the grant of permission under the FC Act is not disposed of during the currency of TWP, the applicant, on the strength of the same TWP, may continue to operate for a period not exceeding three months unless specific orders are obtained from this Court; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 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. 1250­1251 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 activities were being carried on inside the wildlife sanctuary. The report of CEC dated 27th May 2003 found number of mines operating around or in two villages, Sankotda and Thali, which were within the sanctuary and the CEC also found that the earlier finding of a Committee could not be taken as conclusive proof that the area involved was a non­forest land and fell outside the sanctuary. The State of Rajasthan, however, has taken a stand in their affidavit affirmed on 15th April 2004 that delineation and demarcation of the boundaries hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a 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 considering condition no.3 of the Government's Notification dated 16th July 1981. (ii) Applicants in I.A. No. 117831 of 2019 are Maharashtra Timber Laghu Udyog Mahasangha alongwith the Poona Timber Merchant (64 saw mills owners) in connection with grant of licenses for operating saw mills. In the present order, we are confining our examination of proceedings arising out of I.A. No. 1000 of 2003. As such, the aforesaid applications ought to be listed independently before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lamingo 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 Government was to be made before the MoEF&CC and it appears that a draft notification dated 8th April 2021 concerning Thane Creek Flamingo Sanctuary has already been published by the MoEF&CC. Let the MoEF&CC take final decision in relation to such draft notification as per the provisions of law. Such decision....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on) 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 inter­alia 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 any area recorded as forest in the Government record irrespective of the ownership. This is how it has to be understood for the purpose of Section 2 of the Act. The provisions enacted in the F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 has been prescribed for declaration of ESZ. Referring to the case of the Goa Foundation (W.P. (C) No. 435/2012), it has been stated in this affidav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st 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 eco­sensitive/eco fragile/buffer/safety zones in that State within which no non­forest 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 achieved in the long term. Such role of the State is more relevant today, than, possibly, at any point of time in history w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 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 site­specific. 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 has been urged that minimum extent of ESZ ought to be as per the CEC recomme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g as per approved 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 non­official members of the Standing Committee have been placed on record, which essentially contempla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e generations to meet their own needs. Therefore, Courts are required to balance development needs with the protection of the environment and ecology. It is the duty of the State under our Constitution to devise and 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntaining a distance of 25 metre from the vicinity of important forest areas like game sanctuary, reserved forest, mining activities to be prohibited. In other forest areas, mining could be undertaken in the immediate vicinity of the forest area as per the policy. This has been stated in the affidavit of the State of Rajasthan filed on 9 th December 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. 1123­1124 of 2004, I.A.Nos.1197­1199 of 2004 and I.A.Nos.1210­1211 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e area by roads, rivers, ridges or other well­known or readily intelligible boundaries." 39. The declaration was made by the State of Rajasthan in 1982 and we do not find any flaw in such declaration. The amended provisions, thus, could not apply to the Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary. The plea taken that it did not have the status of a sanctuary because no declaration was there under Section 26A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 is without any basis. We shall proceed in 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 thi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s have been quoted in the earlier part of this order. In the affidavit of Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife filed on 26th November 2012, the views of said Committee was expressed and the Committee was of unanimous opinion that each State ought to delineate the outer limits of ESZ on a site­specific, case by case basis, keeping in view the ecological imperatives and the grounds realities of the protected area. It was also the view of the said Committee that expert opinion and scientific inputs ought to be obtained from individuals 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 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ixing the ESZ as in the past, the buffer zone varied from 25 metres to 100 metres. In our opinion, ESZ of 500 metres would be a reasonable buffer zone, within which subsisting activities which does not come within the prohibited list as per the Guidelines of 9th February 2011 could be carried on. But for commencing of any new activity which would be otherwise permissible, the ESZ norm of one kilometre shall be maintained for Jamua Ramgarh sanctuary. 44. We accordingly direct:­ (a) Each protected forest, that is national park or wildlife sanctuary must have an ESZ of minimum one 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 sanctu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er body of persons or individual having special interest in environmental issues consider it necessary for maintaining a wider or larger ESZ in respect of any national park or wildlife sanctuary, such body or individual shall approach the CEC. In such a situation the CEC shall be at liberty to examine the need of a wider ESZ in respect of any national park or wildlife sanctuary in consultation with all the stakeholders including the State or Union Territory concerned, MoEF&CC as also the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife and then approach this Court with its recommendations. (h) In respect of sanctuaries or national parks for which 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.&n....