Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

2 8 Th M Arch vs Union Of I Ndia & Ot Hers on 28 March, 2025

     I N TH E H I GH COURT OF UTTARAKH AN D
                      AT N AI N I TAL

              H ON 'BLE TH E CH I EF JUSTI CE SRI G. N AREN D AR
                                        AN D
                    H ON 'BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK M AH RA


                  W RI T PETI TI ON ( PI L) N O. 3 7 OF 2 0 2 5

                                2 8 TH M ARCH , 2 0 2 5


Reenu Paul                                               ......                Pet it ioner

Versus


Union of I ndia & ot hers                                ......            Respondent s


Counsel for t he pet it ioner             :   Mr. Abhij ay Negi, Ms. Snigdha
                                              Tiwari and Arm aan Prat ap Singh,
                                              learned counsels

Counsel for t he respondent s             :   Mr.     Raj esh  Sharm a,   learned
                                              St anding Counsel for t he Union of
                                              I ndia / respondent No 1

                                          :   Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned St anding
                                              Counsel for St at e of Ut t arakhand /
                                              respondent Nos. 2 and 3



Th e Cou r t m a de t h e follow in g:

ORD ER: ( pe r H on 'ble Th e Ch ie f Ju st ice Sr i G. N a r e n da r )


I m ple a dm e nt Applica t ion ( I .A. N o. 0 2 of 2 0 2 5 )




1.      I .A. No. 02 of 2025 is preferred by t he pet it ioner t o

array t he Proj ect proponent s, i.e., Nat ional Highways

Aut horit y of I ndia as a part y respondent .
                                    2




2.    The NHAI being a necessary part y, t he applicat ion

is allowed.        Pet it ioner t o am end t he cause t it le, and

furnish copy of t he writ pet it ion t o t he learned counsel

for t he NHAI .


W r it Pe t it ion ( PI L) N o. 3 7 of 2 0 2 5


3.    Heard t he learned counsel for t he pet it ioner Mr.

Abhij ay Negi, t he learned counsel for respondent NHAI

Mr. Naresh Pant assist ed by Mr. Raunak Pant , and t he

learned St anding Counsel for t he St at e of Ut t arakhand

Mr. B.S. Parihar.


4.    The PCCF ( Wild Life) Mr. R.K. Mishra is virt ually

present .        Mr. Pankaj Maurya, Proj ect Direct or, NHAI

along wit h Mr. Rahul Meena, Manager Technical, NHAI

are also present .


5.    The Court has conveyed it s apprehension wit h

regard      to    m aint aining   t he   widt h   of   t he   Elephant

Corridors while execut ing t he proj ect and const ruct ing

t he roads.      I n ot her w ords, it is relevant t o ensure t hat

t he proj ect does not prove disast rous t o t he fauna and

t he pachyderm s, t he big cat s like t igers and leopards,

and sm all anim als like t he hyenas, foxes, t he deer et c.

which populat e t he forest t hrough which t he road is
                                3




proposed. I t is also a m at t er of record t hat t he forest is

populat ed wit h a huge num ber of rept iles. Keeping t his

in view, t he DPR appears t o have provided for elevat ed

const ruct ion of cert ain port ions of t he road and providing

of culvert s, box culvert s for t he big cat s and sm all

anim als, and hum e pipes for rept iles.


6.    The Proj ect Direct or, NHAI would subm it t hat t he

hum e pipes are provided from a dist ance of 60 m et ers t o

260    m et ers   and   t he   box   culvert s     are   provided

int erm it t ent ly. I n all, 06 box culvert s are planned along

wit h 30 num ber of hum e pipes of 1200 m m diam et er.

The 06 box culvert s on t he elevat ed roads and hum e

pipes are provided for t he 9.7 Km . of forest st ret ch t o

facilit at e t he m ovem ent of pachyderm s, t he big cat s, t he

ot her anim als, rept iles & am phibians, and ot her sm aller

fauna. I t is also st at ed t hat fencing and a green hedge

along t he borders of t he road is planned.


7.    The Court     has suggest ed t hat         t he fencing be

com plim ent ed w it h a cover of wire m esh t o prevent

rept iles from com ing t o t he carriage way as it is com m on

knowledge t hat t he rept iles oft en prefer t he roads which

are warm during t he night s on account of t he const ant

m ovem ent of t raffic and t he exposure t o sound, t hus
                                4




result ing in accident al deat h of t he rept iles. Adm it t edly,

t he scope of t he hearing is t o ensure t he safet y of t he

anim als and t o m inim ize t he cut t ing of t he t rees.


8.     I t is subm it t ed t hat in all 3357 t rees, and 1085

num ber of saplings, have been ident ified.          I n so far as

t he   saplings    are   concerned,    t he   repercussions    are

m inim al.   That in respect of t he t rees t he repercussion

can be felt as it leads t o t he denudat ion of t he forest

cover and w ill affect t he anim als populat ing t hat part of

t he area.        Hence,   we direct     t he Proj ect   Direct or,

Rishikesh- Bhaniyawala Four Lane Road Proj ect t o consult

t he Forest Research I nst it ut e in Dehradun, and we also

t ake t his opport unit y t o direct t he Forest Depart m ent

and, m ore part icularly, Mr. R.K. Mishra, t he PCCF ( Wild

Life) t o share his expert ise and have j oint m eet ings w it h

t he FRI and device ways and m eans t o save m axim um

num ber of t rees by t ransplant ing t hem t o ot her part s of

t he forest , m ore part icularly, in and around t he area

where t he road proj ect is proposed.         This is in order t o

ensure t hat t he green coverage does not get drast ically

alt ered.


9.      The Proj ect Direct or, NHAI and t he PCCF ( Wild

Life) shall, aft er t he m eet ing w it h t he FRI , subm it a list
                                     5




of t he t rees t hat can be saved by t ransplant ing t hem .

That apart , a st at em ent shall also be m ade regarding t he

passage t hat would be available for t he pachyderm s, and

also assure t his Court t hat t he widt h of t he Elephant

Corridors will not be com prom ised at any of t he Elephant

Corridors report ed in our order.               The Proj ect Direct or,

NHAI shall also look int o t he ruling of t he Apex Court

rendered in H ospit a lit y Associa t ion of M u du m a la i Vs I n

de fe n ce   of   Envir onm e n t       a nd   An im a ls   and   ot h e r s,

( 2 0 2 0 ) 1 0 Su pr e m e Cou r t Ca se s 5 8 9 .


10.    On t he request of Mr. Pankaj Maurya, Proj ect

Direct or, NHAI , list t he m at t er on 04.04.2025.



                                                   ________________
                                                   G. N AREN D AR, C.J.

____________ ALOK M AH RA, J.

Dt : 28 TH MARCH, 2025 Negi