Madras High Court
Mr.S.Muralidharan vs Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests ... on 18 July, 2018
Author: M.Sathyanarayanan
Bench: M.Sathyanarayanan, N.Seshasayee
W.P.No.27289 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 05.11.2019
DELIVERED ON : 20.12.2019
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
W.P.No.27289 of 2019
and WMP.No.26718 of 2019
Mr.S.Muralidharan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.Principal Chief Conservator of Forests &
Chief Wildlife Warden,
Department of Forests,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
No.1, Jeenis Road, Panagal Buildings,
Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
2.Central Leather Research Institute,
Represented by its Director,
Adyar, Chennai-600 020. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 1 st respondent
from catching deer from the campus of the 2nd respondent or in any other
places in and around Chennai.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.P.Chockalingam
For Respondents : Mr.S.V.Vijay Prasanth,
Addl. Govt. Pleader (Forest) for R1
Mr.T.Ravikumar,
Standing Counsel for CLRI (R2)
http://www.judis.nic.in
1
W.P.No.27289 of 2019
ORDER
M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.
The writ petition is filed as a Public Interest Litigation by the petitioner, who claims to be an avid animal lover and that he is doing lot of activities for the protection and conservation of wild as well as domestic animals. The petitioner also claims that he is running a registered organization called “INCARE”, through which he is carrying on the following animal welfare activities:
i. Establishing the rights of the owners of domestic pets. ii. Rescuing injured animals, treating them in clinics and returning them back to their location iii. Rescuing and up keeping of old and handicapped dogs. iv. Rescuing and rehabilitating abandoned pets. v. Donating blood for needy dogs across Chennai. vi. Curing skin infections and maggot wounds on stray and pet animals. vii.Rescuing cattle from illegal cattle trafficking to Kerala. viii.Fighting cases in court against cattle traffickers. ix. Educating and enlightening about misconception on Elephant domestication to general public. x. Supporting Elephants being used in Temple rituals. xi. Creating awareness and alerting authorities on man, animal conflict and suggesting remedies to authorities. xii.Exposing Veganism & International conspiracy against Indian animals to public.
http://www.judis.nic.in xiii.Running veterinary camps for poor owners of animals.2 W.P.No.27289 of 2019
xiv.Conducting training on animal laws to law enforcers in TN districts. xv. Enabling birth control surgeries to stray dogs to reduce menace.
2. The petitioner would state that the second respondent is housed in 75 acres of land and it lies adjacent to Guindy National Park, Children's Park and Snake Park and the said places situate right in the heart of Chennai city and it is also a forest area and over a period of time, large extent of forest area got fragmented and diverted for location of various institutions, which include the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Madras. The petitioner would further state that Guindy National Park is home to 400 Black Bucks - an endangered species, 2000 Spotted Deers (cheetal), 24 Jackals, variety of snakes, 14 species of mammals and 130 species of birds among others. The Spotted Deer populations are found in Raj Bhavan – Hon'ble Governor's residence, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) and Central Leather Research Institute (CLRI) – second respondent herein.
3. The petitioner would further state that deer, being ungulates (hoofed mammals), are prolific breeders and multiply in large numbers in a short span of time and the absence of large predators in Chennai is an additional factor for such large population of deers. The petitioner has also http://www.judis.nic.in 3 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 pointed out that on account of expansion of human habitation especially, large part of reserve forest area has been diverted for the establishment of institutions like IIT, CLRI etc., and memorials for famous leaders, the Spotted Deers got used to human habitation and started feeding on garbage dumbed by people of the said localities and that apart, senseless, unscientific and poor waste disposal management are also adding to the thriving of deer population outside it's habitats and in that process, deers used to intake plastic items, as it is incapable of segregating plastics from food items. An arterial road is also lying closer by to the said place and sometimes deers used to get hit and die due to vehicular traffic.
4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the first respondent, under the garb of transferring / translocating deers, had translocated some deers to Tiger Reserve Forest areas and within a few days of such relocation, some of them got killed by wild animals on account of being translocated to an entirely new environment and it is also adding to the death of transferred/translocated deers. The first respondent is contemplating to catch 70 deers from the campus of the second respondent for relocation and if it is permitted, the translocated deers will not cope up with surviving adventures of wild life and the deers, which are to be http://www.judis.nic.in 4 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 translocated, right from birth are used to human habitation and never seen large predators like Tigers, Leopards etc., and they also suffer attack by dogs and as such, translocation lead to large number of death of deers.
5. The petitioner also suggested that the first respondent had to work with the planning authorities to prevent mushrooming of buildings in IIT and Anna University campuses, which was once a Reserve Forest area and to improve greenery in those places, shall dug ponds and conduct more scientific methods for catching and translocating deers and however, without doing so, all of a sudden translocation is sought to be made and the same is also against the provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and as well as against Articles 48A and 51A of the Constitution of India and hence, prays for appropriate direction, forbearing the first respondent from catching deers from the campus of the second respondent or in any other places, in and around Chennai.
6. Mr.S.P.Chockalingam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to newspaper cuttings appeared in News Dailies and would submit that without adopting scientific methods, Spotted Deers, which are roaming around the campus of the second http://www.judis.nic.in 5 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 respondent, are suddenly caught and on account of crude and unscientific methods, some of them died on the spot and that apart, they are translocated and have to travel for quite long distance and on account of translocation also they die and few surviving animals, which are released in Reserve Forest also died on account of sudden animal attack and hence prays for appropriate orders restraining the authorities from translocating Spotted Deers from the campus of the second respondent.
7. Mr.S.V.Vijay Prasanth, learned Additional Government Pleader (Forest) appearing for the first respondent has invited the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit of the first respondent and would submit that population estimation exercise is carried out every year for large animals in the Guindy National Park and as per 2018 Estimation exercise conducted, there are about 55 Black Bucks and 159 Spotted Deers in the Guindy National Park and free ranging Spotted Deer population is found in Raj Bhavan, IIT campus, CLRI campus and Anna University campus etc., but the above areas are not the natural habitat of the Spotted Deers. It is the further submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader (Forest) that Spotted Deers face multiple threats outside the Reserve Forest areas in Chennai and due to these threats, several deers lose their lives or severely http://www.judis.nic.in 6 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 injure or suffer from illness and some of the threats are feral dogs attack, pollution, solid waste intake, death due to polythene ingestion, vehicle hit etc., and in order to save them, action has been taken in a scientific manner to translocate the deers.
8. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Forest) appearing for the first respondent would further submit that as per the records available, 497 Spotted Deers have been reported death in the last five years due to the above mentioned threats and specifically denied that crude methods are adopted for catching the deers and also invited the attention of this Court to paragraph No.10 of the counter affidavit as to the statistics. Insofar as the translocation of Spotted Deers from the campus of the second respondent is concerned, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader (Forest) that there is hardly any open space left in the second respondent campus due to continuous building constructions/developments and 2 Spotted Deers died during August, 2019 due to vehicle hit and polythene impaction and during the past 5 years, 32 Spotted Deers reported death in the campus of the second respondent and therefore, it was felt that the retention of the said deers in the campus of the second respondent is not considered to be suitable and hence, a conscious decision has been taken to http://www.judis.nic.in 7 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 translocate them and it cannot be faulted with.
9. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Forest) appearing for the first respondent has also drawn the attention of this Court to G.O.(D) No.193, Environment and Forest Department dated 18.07.2018, in and by which a sum of Rs.24 lakhs was sanctioned for capture and relocation of 281 Spotted Deers in Chennai and it's surroundings for the year 2018-2019 and consequently, an order was also passed by the first respondent, vide proceedings No.WL6/13694/2018 dated 19.06.2019 imposing certain directions/conditions in transporting the captured Spotted Deers. Lastly, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader (Forest) that the petitioner, instead of pointing out any statutory infraction, merely made a submission in the affidavit based on surmises and failed to produce any tenable material as to the stand taken by him and hence, prays for dismissal of this writ petition.
10. This Court paid its anxious consideration and best attention to the rival submissions and also perused the entire materials placed before it. http://www.judis.nic.in 8 W.P.No.27289 of 2019
11. A perusal of the counter affidavit of the first respondent would disclose that total area of Guindy National Reserve Forest was 513.75 Ha and an area of 172.91 Ha was deserved for formation of various institutions namely, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras in 1961, Guru Nanak College in 1970, Cancer Institute in 1977 and an area of 7.32 Ha was utilized by the Public Works Department for constructing Gandhi Mandapam, Rajaji Memorial and Kamaraj Memorial and out of the balance Reserve Forest area of 340.84 Ha, an area of 270.57 Ha was declared as Guindy National Park, vide G.O.Ms.No.773, Forest Department dated 04.09.1978, out of which Raj Bhavan admeasures an extent of 59.16 Ha and 0.11 Ha was diverted for Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Sub-Station and an area of 11 Ha is retained as Reserve Forest Area. Thus, large extent of Reserve Forest area got shrunk on account of the establishment of various educational institutions, memorials etc.
12. It is also pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that deers, being hoofed animals, are prolific breeders and multiply in large numbers within a sport span of time and the area of habitat, in the light of the above cited reasons and also on account of establishment of various educational institutions, got shrunk drastically. The Spotted http://www.judis.nic.in 9 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 Deers also habituated to human population and started consuming various food articles and in that process, plastics gets ingested into their bodies and death of deers occur on account of such consumption of plastics also.
13. It is the stand of the first respondent that Spotted Deers are listed under Schedule III of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and as per Section 9 of the said Act “no person shall hunt any wild animal specified in Schedule I, II, III and IV except as provided under Sections 11 and 12”.
14. It is also relevant to extract some of the provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and Wild Life (Protection) (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1975.
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 Section 2(16) - “hunting”, with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions, includes, -
(a) killing or poisoning of any wild animal or captive animal and every attempt to do so;
(b) capturing, coursing, snaring, trapping, driving or baiting any wild or captive animal and every attempt to do so;
(c) injuring or destroying or taking any part of the body of any such animal or, in the case of wild birds or reptiles, damaging the eggs of such birds or reptiles, or disturbing the eggs or nests of such birds or reptiles.” http://www.judis.nic.in Section 12. Grant of Permit for special purposes. -10 W.P.No.27289 of 2019
Notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this Act, it shall be lawful for the Chief Wild Life Warden, to grant a permit, by an order in writing stating the reasons therefor, to any person, on payment of such fee as may be prescribed, which shall entitle the holder of such permit to hunt, subject to such condition as may be specified therein, any wild animal specified in such permit, for the purpose of.-0
(a) education ;
(b) scientific research ;
(bb) scientific management.
Explanation.- For the purposes of clause (bb), the expression, “scientific management” means -
(i) translocation of any wild animals to an alternative suitable habitat ; or
(ii) population management of wildlife without killing or poisoning or destroying any wild animals; or
(c) collection of specimens-
(i) for recognised zoos, subject to the permission under section 38-I; or
(ii) for museums and similar institutions;
(d) derivation, collection or preservation of snake-venom for the manufacture of life-saving drugs;
Provided that no such permit shall be granted.-
(a) in respect of any wild animal specified in Schedule I, except with the previous permission of the Central Government, and
(b) in respect of any other wild animal, except with the previous permission of the State Government.” Wild Life (Protection) (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1975 Rule 17. General conditions governing grant of licence.-
....
(4) The wild animals trapping licence shall specify the method that would be permitted for the capture of the wild animals specified therein and the conditions under which the wild animal could be trapped, and shall be subject to the restrictions imposed by Section 17.
15. The counter affidavit of the first respondent would disclose that as http://www.judis.nic.in 11 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 per 2018 Estimation exercise, Guindy National Park is estimated to have 55 Black Bucks and 159 Spotted Deers and also given statistics that on account of constructions, electric lines, gadgets, pipelines, stray dogs attack, pollution, solid waste ingestion, food waster, sewage water, vehicle hits, junk foods feeding by children, death of 497 numbers of Spotted Deers have been reported / recorded by the Forest Department in the last five years in Chennai Urban areas. It is also the stand of the first respondent that rescue team in the Head Quarters Forest Range of the Chennai Wild Life Division is experienced in capture and relocation of straying wild animals and every year more than 6000 urban wildlife rescue and rehabilitation works are carried out by the team including Spotted Deers, monkeys, snakes, birds etc. and 42 numbers of Spotted Deers were rescued and relocated. In paragraph No.10 of the counter affidavit, the first respondent has given particulars relating to that. Therefore, in the considered opinion of the Court, translocation of Spotted Deers by the first respondent cannot be faulted with.
16. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that all of a sudden Spotted Deers are transferred from Urban jungle to far away Reserve Forest areas and they are put in a new http://www.judis.nic.in 12 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 environment/surrounding and the said animals do not know how to defend themselves from wild animal attacks, which is also leading to their immediate death. As rightly pointed out by the first respondent in the counter affidavit, Spotted Deers are wild animals and possess natural instincts to survive in natural wilderness and in forest areas, deer is a natural prey species for large carnivores and therefore, attack by a predator i.e., Leopard is part of the natural prey-predator ecological cycle. It is also the stand of the first respondent that deers, whenever released in natural forest areas, are monitored for a month until the released herd freely mingles with the existing local deer population and therefore, this Court does not find any fault in the transfer/translocation of Spotted Deers from the campus of the second respondent or from nearby areas such as IIT etc.
17. The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and Wild Life (Protection) (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1975 do not contain any specific provision or guideline as to the manner in which Spotted Deers is to be caught. Section 2(16)(b) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 says that “capturing, coursing, snaring, trapping, driving or baiting any wild or captive animal and every attempt to do so” also amounts to “hunting” and it is an inclusive definition. Section 12 of the Act speaks about grant of permit for special http://www.judis.nic.in 13 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 purposes and as per clause (ii) of Section 12(bb), the expression “scientific management” means “population management of wildlife without killing or poisoning or destroying any wild animals”.
18. Form No.6 of the Wild Life (Protection) (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1975 speaks about Wild Animal Trapping Licence and as per Column (5) of the said form, “The licensee shall, while trapping, strictly adhere to the provisions of Section 17 of the Act and Rule 17 of the Wild Life (Protection) (Tamil Nadu) Rules, 1975”. Sections 13 to 17 (both inclusive) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 were omitted by Act 44 of 1991, with effect from 02.10.1991.
19. Attention of this Court was not drawn to any administrative instructions / guidelines as to the manner in which Spotted Deers are caught/trapped for the purpose of translocation to forest areas.
20. This Court, on it's own, also done some research as to the catching and handling of deer and came across an article in the form of a web page, which has been prepared for “UK Wildlife : First Aid and Care” Wildpro module and it was designed for the needs of various species and http://www.judis.nic.in 14 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 the said information is scanned and incorporated in this hereunder:
http://www.judis.nic.in 15 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 16 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 17 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 18 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 19 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 20 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 21 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 22 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 23 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 24 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 25 W.P.No.27289 of 2019
21. The apprehension expressed by the petitioner as to the immediate shock sustained when it is caught and relocated all of a sudden cannot be brushed aside and in paragraph No.9 of the affidavit, he points out that during one such operation, 6 deers escaped and one deer was hit by a speeding vehicle and the remaining deers were caught and relocated in Guindy National Park and out of which, 9 have died immediately due to stress and trauma and admittedly, deer is a very sensitive animal and as such, absolute caution and scientific manner is to be adopted while capturing the said wild animal for the purpose of translocation and in this regard, the first respondent, in consultation with the experts available in the http://www.judis.nic.in 26 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 field, shall form necessary guidelines and issue circulars to the officials concerned.
22. This Court also expressed it's anguish as to the shrinking of forest cover and natural habitat for wild animals despite the fact that all Laws are in place to meet out any eventualities, but as usual, there is no strict implementation of Laws and Regulations and it is also tardy and the offenders are also let scot-free on account of improper implementation of the provisions of the Act, Rules and Regulations. It is also highly doubtful whether the officials, who are enforcing the Laws / Rules / Regulations, are aware of the provisions of the same.
23. It is high time that periodical training is to be imparted to them especially launching of criminal prosecution against the offenders by qualitative investigation so that adequate and appropriate sentences are imposed, which would definitely act as a deterrent to the offenders, who regularly commit offences under Forest Laws.
24. This Court, on a careful scrutiny and appreciation of the materials placed and also on consideration of the submission made by the respective http://www.judis.nic.in 27 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 learned counsel appearing for the parties, is of the considered view that transfer/translocation of Spotted Deers, especially from the campus of the second respondent cannot be faulted with; but at the same time requires the first respondent/Forest Department to frame necessary guidelines as to the manner in which trapping/catching of wild animals is to be done and one such clue is available in the form of web page information extracted above and there are very many articles also available in this regard.
25. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed, subject to the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Call on 21.01.2020 for filing affidavit of the first respondent as to the condition of the translocated animals and guidelines for trapping/catching wild animals.
[M.S.N., J.] [N.S.S., J.] 20.12.2019 Index : No Internet : Yes Jvm To
1.Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Chief Wildlife Warden, Department of Forests, Government of Tamil Nadu, No.1, Jeenis Road, Panagal Buildings, http://www.judis.nic.in Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. 28 W.P.No.27289 of 2019
2.The Director, Central Leather Research Institute, Adyar, Chennai-600 020.
Copy to:
The Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Forest and Environment Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
http://www.judis.nic.in 29 W.P.No.27289 of 2019 M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J., and N.SESHASAYEE, J.
Jvm Order in W.P.No.27289 of 2019 20.12.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in 30