National Green Tribunal
Bhera Lal Goyal vs Ministry Of Environment Forest And ... on 18 October, 2023
Item No. 01
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL
(Through Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 113/2023(CZ)
(O.A. No. 252/2023 - PB)
(I.A. No. 92/2023), (I.A. No. 93/2023), (I.A. No. 94/2023)
Bheera Lal Goyal & Ors. Applicant(s)
Vs
MoEF&CC & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of Completion of Hearing and Reserving of Order : 11.10.2023
Date of Uploading of Order on the Website : 18.10.2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Mr. Rahul Khurana, Adv.
Mr. Hasil Jain, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Prachi Mishra, Adv.
(with Mr. Dipesh Singhal, Adv.,
Mr. Rebecca Mishra, Adv. alongwith
Mr. Bhaghirath Ramji, SDM, Pali
Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Adv.
Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, Adv.
Dr. B.S. Nathawal, Adv.
ORDER
1. Heard the argument and perused the records.
2. The grievance of the applicant is the construction of project/resort being undertaken by the Respondent no. 8 and 9 within the Eco Sensitive Zone of KUMBHALGARH WILDLIFE SANCTUARY Rajasthan and the said land is roughly 50 metre away from the boundary of KWLS and Ranakpur Dam. Vehicular pollution is also being caused by emissions from construction vehicles plying in ESZ. Heavy earth moving machinery in operation also blows huge cloud of dust to nearby area of park. There is illegal felling of trees in the forest within Eco Sensitive Zone and the said land is hill area 1 shown Charagrah Land in revenue record. The said project will lead to serious impact on the Wildlife of the Sanctuary.
3. Kumbhalgarh WLS is a 610.528 sq. km area carved out of Udaipur, Rajasmand and Pali districts in Rajasthan. This landscape acts as an ecotone between hilly Aravalli Range forests and the Thar Desert to its west. The area is also known for species diversity of both flora and fauna. It is also a source of perennial streams which form rivers. There are a total of 24 villages within the boundaries of the Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary. The Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary was declared in the year 1971 vide Government of Rajasthan. Subsequently, the collectors of Pali, Udaipur and Rajsamand districts have re-notified the area of the Sanctuary in 1998, and therefore, it is currently spread over an area of 601.528 sq. kms. In early 2012, the notification of intent for developing the Sanctuary along with Todgarh Raoli wildlife sanctuary into a National Park was published. In 2019, the intention to declare the area a National Park was publicised but before any steps were taken in that direction, the proposal for the tiger reserve was floated. On 18.06.2020, the MoEF&CC came out with draft notification declaring eco sensitive zone around KWLS. The area under this range from 0 km to 5 km around KWLS was designated as Eco Sensitive Zone (ESZ) vide Notification dated 18.06.2020, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), under the provisions of the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986, (EP Act). The Notification mentions that the area has significant ecological importance with varied flora and fauna.
4. Currently, the Expert Committee on ESZs of the MoEF&CC has asked the Rajasthan State Government to collate and comment on the public representation received on the proposed notification for the ESZ. Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary is situated in one of the most fragile ecosystem of Aravallis. The Notification of 2020 gives boundaries of the ESZ 2 wherein the some activities are to be regulated, and some activities to be prohibited. It prohibited certain commercial activities and more particularly at para no.4 at point no. 8 in the table appended, whereby under head of "Commercial establishment of hotels and resorts", No new commercial hotels and resorts shall be permitted within one kilometre of the boundary of the protected area or upto the extent of Eco Sensitive Zone, whichever is nearer, except for small temporary structures for ecotourism activities.
5. A parcel of land measuring 1.3 hectare was leased out to Respondent No.8 vide sale deed/lease deed dated 11/01/2021 by Nagar Palika Sadri (Pali) in khasra no. 4603 village Sadri Tehsil Desuri District Pali Rajasthan. The tentative coordinates of the project site is 25007'59.3"N 73028'10.8"E. The said coordinates come within the Eco Sensitive Zone of the KWLS. The Project Proponent is constructing Lake Ranakpur Resort on the leased out land which would involve raising of permanent structures in the close vicinity of the KWLS and which site is situated at the boundary of Ranakpur Dam. The coordinates of Ranakpur Dam is 25008'3.44"N73028'42.76"E. The Project Proponent is undertaking construction on hill and mountain area which is shown as Gair Mumkin Magra in Khasra no. 4603. The said area is also described as Charagrah land in Revenue Record.
6. It is further alleged that the construction activity started after registration of the sale deed by the Respondent No. 8 would adversely affect the eco- sensitive zone of the Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary. Thus this petition.
7. Notices were issued and respondent no. 1 MoEF&CC has submitted that that the National Environment Policy, 2006 defines 'Eco Sensitive Zones (ESZ)' as areas / zones, 'with identified environmental resources having incomparable values which require special attention for their conservation'. The purpose of declaring ESZ is to create some kind of "Shock Absorber" for the specialized Ecosystem, such as Protected Areas or other natural sites. The ESZ is meant to act as a transition zone from areas of high protection to 3 areas involving lesser protection. The main objectives of the ESZ inter-alia amongst other include :-
i. To maintain the response level of an ecosystem within the permissible limits with respect to the environmental parameters;
and protection to areas involving lesser protection. The main objectives of the ESZ inter-alia amongst others include:
i. to maintain the response level of an ecosystem within the permissible limits with respect to environmental parameters; and ii. to notify the area as an Eco- sensitive zone based on its need for special protection because of its landscape, wildlife, historical value, etc. and to regulate the developmental activities in order to maintain the carrying capacity of that area and to ensure sustainable development taking into consideration the needs and aspiration of the local people.
8. In the instant case the draft ESZ Notification has been published vide number S.O.No.1960 (E), dated 18.06.2020. The ESZ extent ranges from of 0(zero) to 5.0 kilometers from the boundary of Kumbbalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary.
9. The Expert Committee decided that the finalization of the draft notification may be deferred pending response of the State Government on the issues/suggestions received from the stakeholders on the draft ESZ notification. Vide letter no. 25/8/2020-ESZ, dated 06.04.2023 of the answering Respondent No.1 (MoEF&CC), informed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest State of Rajasthan (Respondent No.3) and the Chief Wildlife Warden, State of Rajasthan (Respondent No. 5) that "the validity period of draft notification published vide number S.O. No.1960 (E), dated 18.06.2020 has now lapsed. In accordance with the provisions of the 4 Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 and the State Government have been requested to submit a fresh/revised proposal for re-publication of draft ESZ notification.
10. Construction of new commercial hotels and resorts are not permitted within one kilometre of the boundary of the Protected Area or upto the extent of the ESZ, whichever is nearer, except for small temporary structures for eco- tourism activities. The respondent no. 1, till date, is not in receipt of any request/proposal from the State Government of Rajasthan for publication of a draft ESZ Notification around Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary.
11. It is argued by the respondent that vide notification dated 18.06.2020 in para 1 the eco-sensitive zone was from 0 (zero) to 5.0 km around the boundary of Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and the area of eco-sensitive zone is approximately 1001.01 sq. km. 0 (zero) extent of eco-sensitive zone in the Northern boundary of Sanctuary is due to common border with the Aravali Totagarh Sanctuary.
12. This notification was lapsed because it was not finalised. The MoEF&CC has categorically communicated the State of Rajasthan and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, State of Rajasthan that the validity period of draft notification published vide notification dated 18.06.2020 has now lapsed and it requires fresh proposal of republication of draft ESZ.
13. If we examine the draft notification at serial no. 8 the new commercial hotels and resorts are in regulated activities and the new tourist activities and expansion of existing activities shall be inconformity with the tourism master plan and guidelines as applicable. It is further provided at serial no. 9 that local people shall be permitted to undertake construction in their land for their use including the activities mentioned in sub paragraph 1 of paragraph 3 as per building by laws to meet the residential needs of the local residence. Provided further that the construction activity related to small scale industries is not causing pollution shall be regulated and kept at the minimum with prior permission with the competent authority as per 5 applicable rules and regulations, if any. At serial no. 11 felling of trees has been taken in regulated categories in accordance with the concerned Central or the State Act and the rules made their under.
14. The National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016) provides that :-
"Local communities traditionally depend on natural biomass and they must, therefore, have the first lien on such resources. Such benefits must be subject to assumption of a basic responsibility to protect and conserve these resources by suitably modifying unsustainable activities. Conservation programmes must attempt to reconcile livelihood security with wildlife protection through creative zonation and by adding new Protected Area (PA) categories in consultation with local communities, such as an inviolate core, conservation buffer, community buffer and multiple use areas."
15. Several communications from the State and Union Territories, Project Proponents and associated organisations and other stakeholders were received by the MoEF&CC regarding clarification about the statutory clearances which are required by the National Board for Wildlife/Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife.
16. The MoEF&CC in light of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, passed Writ Petition No. 460/2004, dated 04.12.2006 and WPC No. 202/ 1995, T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India dated 04.08.2006, and various orders passed in Goa Foundation vs Union of India in WPC No. 435/2012 a clarification in the form of Office Memorandum dated 17.05.2022 was issued in which applicability of EC, EFC and WC in ESZ/ESC areas has been notified as follows :
"In supersession of Ministry's previous OM No. 22/43/2018- IA.III dated 08.08.2019 and OM No. 6-60/2020WL Part (I) dated 16.07.2020, the following procedure is prescribed w.r.t. applicability of EC. FC and WC in ESZ/ESA and other ecologically significant areas outside PA:6
Clearance Project/Activity in Project/Activity Project/Activity Category Notified ESZ Around PA outside outside PA in area or in notified ESA PAw6erMoESZmoo which is part of t notified or ESZ Tiger Reserve or Notification is at linking one PA or draft stage Tiger Reserve to another PA or Tiger Reserve Environmental Project/Activity shall be For Project/Activity For Project/Activity Clearance (EC) regulated and governed by Covered Under the covered under the the concerned ESZ/ESA Schedule of EIA Schedule of EIA Notification Accordingly, Notification. 2006; Notification, 2006:
activities prohibited under prior EC as per the Prior EC as per the
the ESZ/ESA Notification prescribed procedure prescribed procedure
cannot be undertaken is mandatory, is mandatory
Whereas, for regulated and anywhere outside anywhere outside
other activities in ESZ/ESA the PA. the PA.
Notification covered under
the Schedule of EIA
Notification, 2006: prior EC
as per the prescribed
procedure is mandatory.
Forest Projects shall be regulated Forest Clearance Forest Clearance
Clearance and governed by the will be required will be required
(FC) concerned ESZ/ESA anywhere outside anywhere outside
Notification. Accordingly, the PA. Only if forest the PA. only if forest
activities prohibited under land is involved and land is involved and
the ESZ Notification cannot proposed activity is proposed activity is
be undertaken Whereas, for for non-Forestry for non-forestry use,
regulated and other use, as per as per provisions of
activities; Forest Clearance provisions of Forest Forest Conservation)
will be required, only if (Conservation) Act, Act, 1980 and Rules
forest land is involved 1980 and Rules and and guidelines
and proposed activity is for guidelines made made there under,
non-forestry use as per there under irrespective of the
provisions of Forest irrespective of the notified
(Conservation) Act, 1980 notified limits/default limits
and Rules and guidelines limits/default limits of ESZ/ESA.
made there under. of ESZ/ESA.
Consideration by
Projects/activities Project/Activity Approval of NBWL /
the National proposed to be located covered under the SCNBWL is
Board of Wild within notified ESZ/ESA Schedule of EIA Mandatory if the
life/Standing shall be regulated and Notification, 2006 project/activity is
Committee of governed by the concerned and located within proposed to be
the National ESZ Notification. 10 km of National located in an area
Board for Accordingly, activities Park or Sanctuary which forms part of
Wildlife prohibited under the ESZ shall require a Tiger Reserve or
(NBWL/SCNB Notification shall not be consideration by the area linking one PA
WL) undertaken Whereas, NB WL / SCNBWL. or Tiger Reserve
regulated and other with another PA or
activities proposed within Tiger Reserve as per
notified ESZ around National section 380(I)(g) of
Park or Sanctuary shall the Wild Life
require consideration by the (Protection Act.
NBWL/SCNBWL, if such 1972.
activity is covered under the
Schedule of EIA
Notification, 2006.
17. A report was called from the Forest Department and vide report dated 10.04.2023 the Deputy Conservator of Forest has reported that there is no 7 tree cutting by the Respondent No. 8 and 9 and the area which has been allotted for project proponent for resort is not within the forest area.
18. It is further submitted that on 20.11.2020 the 43rd meeting of the Expert Committee on Eco-Sensitive Zone was held and vide item no. 14, it was resolved as under:
"Item No. 14: Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary, Rajasthan The draft notification for declaration of ESZ around Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary was published on 18.06.2020 for seeking public comments. The salient features of the draft Eco- Sensitive Zone (ESZ) are as follows:
Area of PA : 610.528 sq km Proposed ESZ area 1001.01 sq km : Proposed Extent : 0 (zero) to 5 kilometres (zero extent towards the northern boundary of the Sanctuary due to common border with the Raoli Todgarh Wildlife Sanctuary).
2. The Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Rajasthan made a presentation before the Expert Committee and informed that Kumnbhalgarh WLS makes an ecotome between hilly forests of Aravallis and Thar Desert situated in the West. That Kumbhalgarh Hills acts as a barrier, checking eastward extension of the Desert and the famous Kumbhalgarh Fort is situated atop a hill is an attractive tourist attraction as well.
3. Representatives of the Ministry informed the Committee that the Ministry have received many public comments/suggestions on the draft Notification for which views of the State Government have not been received. The Committee observed that the State Government need go through the public comments and its views need to be furnished at an early date.
4. Based on the deliberations held, the Committee decided decision on finalization of the draft notification may be deferred pending response of the State Government on the issues/suggestions received from the public on the draft notification."8
19. Minutes of the meeting was communicated by the MoEF&CC to the PCCF, Jaipur for providing views and comments of the Govt. of Rajasthan. Vide correspondence dated 06.04.2023 the MoEF&CC, Govt. of India, ESZ Division communicated the PCCF and Chief Wildlife Warden, Jaipur that after completion of 725 days the validity of draft notification dated 18.06.2020 has lapsed as per Environment Protection Amendment Rules, 2020. In view of the above the State of Rajasthan was requested to submit revised proposal for publication of redraft to the Ministry at the earliest, so as to facilitate further necessary action in the manner.
20. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents are that the notification which was issued in 2020 has lapsed and another notification is under the stage of finalisation or preparation and State of Rajasthan is intentionally delaying the notification/finalisation of the Eco-sensitive area.
21. The submission of the learned counsel for respondent nos. 8 and 9 are that the application filed by petitioner is barred by limitation and further that :-
1. "Original Application has been filed particularly relying the judgment dated on 22.03.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of titled as "T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Versus Union of India" being Writ Petition Civil No. 202 of 1995. However, the said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been modified vide judgment dated 26.04.2023 whereby, the restriction in 1Km area was made 'not applicable' in respect of which a draft and final notification issued by the MOEF & CC and in respect of the proposals received by the Ministry. Hence in view of the such modifications, the present application has become infructuous.
2. That the activity of development for "Tourism (resort)" comes under the 'regulated activity' as per the guidelines dated 09.02.2011 and even the draft notification dated 18.06.2020 does not prohibited tourism activity within the eco-sensitive zone. Hence the present application is 9 mere in attempt to stop the answering respondent from getting the further permissions.
3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while passing the Judgment in T. N. Godavarman (Supra) has categorically observed that the person can file objections to the draft notification so if there is any objection, the Original Application ought to have approach the government Authorities before filed the present Application and particularly knowing the fact that the draft notification has not been finalised.
4. Respondents has been allotted the land in question by the State Government in the year 2011 pursuant to 2007- Tourist Policy of the State Government for the purpose of Tourist Facility (i.e. Resort) in the land in question. Thereafter, several permissions were sought from different departments i.e. PWD, Water Department, Forest Department, Nagar Palika, RSPCB etc. Moreover, various discussion occurred with the State Authorities and concerned departments regarding the ESZ and after opinion from various State Departments and due deliberation, the no objection was granted only for a smaller area out of the total area and that to with certain conditions being a regulated activity.
5. That the land in question has been allotted and sanctioned for the purpose of tourism with several conditions and the State Government after following the due procedure of law has granted the same which is evident from the various permissions sought by the Answering Respondents till date.
6. That even for the draft notification, the answering Respondent has also filed its objections and that will be decided during the finalisation of the said draft notification and even the Hon'ble Supreme Court has left with the State Authorities and Central government qua the demarcation of the ESZ and regulated/permitted activities so which is pending at final stage for approval at Government level.10
7. That there is no felling of tress in the land in question as not even a single document has been placed on record which can show the felling of trees. In fact, the answering Respondent has planted hundreds of trees and further even the report submitted by the DFO itself goes on to show that there is no felling of trees in the land in question. Hence the said allegation is bald and frivolous.
8. That in the year 2007, the State Government came with the Tourism Policy (Rajasthan Tourism Unit policy 2007) whereby, Lands were allotted and converted for the Hotels and other tourism purpose.
9. That in the year 2010, the Answering Respondents applied for the allotment of the land in the Tourism Department. Pursuant to the same, in the year 2011, the Answering Respondent were allotted a piece of land admeasuring 5.90 hectors out of which 1.30 Hec. was allotted for Tourism purpose by the Nagar Palika, Sadri (Pali)bearing Khasra No 4603, Village Sadri, Tehsil Desuri, District Pali, Rajasthan.
At this juncture, it is pertinent to mention that the land in question was with revenue Department and was within the periphery of the Municipal Corporation which was marked for tourism purpose.
10. That thereafter, the Answering respondents sought no objection from the Forest Department, Rajasthan for the purpose of 'Resort, which was granted on 21.01.2011, stating that the Khasra No. 4603 admeasuring 2.50 hec. out of 5.90 Hec. Does not come under the Forest Area and further mention that the land in question is around 150-300 meters away from the boundary of the Kumbhalgarh National Park.
11. That thereafter, the Answering Respondents further sought No Objection from the Public Works Department, Bali , Rajasthan and vide letter dated 01.02.2011, the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department granted the said No Objection Certificate to the Answering Respondents for the purpose of Tourism and Construction of Resol at Khasra No. 4603.
11
12. Further, on 01.02.2011 the Water Department also granted the No Objection Certificate with regard to the Tourism facility/Resort at Khasra No. 4603, Sadri, Rajasthan with few conditions.
13. That on 09.02.2011, the guidelines for declaration of eco sensitive zones around national Park and Wildlife Sanctuary was issued by the MoEF&CC wherein in the tourism was marked under the regulated category at Serial No. 5.
14. The Answering Respondents applied No Objection to the office of Executive Engineer Public Development Section, District Pali which was granted vide the said Department on 31.07.2014 for the Tourism-Resort purpose.
15. On 24.04.2018, the Forest Department, Rajasthan granted No objection for the tourism-resort purpose aher discussing the issue of land in question being within the 1 Km from the boundary of sanctuary and within the Eco Sensitive Zone. It was further observed that the land in question has been "exempted" for the tourist-Resol facility vide Government order dated 13.05.2016. Moreover, the land in question is away from the boundary of Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary and 1.30 hec. out of total area has been allotted for tourism-resort purpose only.
16. On 25.07.2018, the Senior Town Planner, Jodhpur Zone further issued letter to Nagar Palika Sadri regarding the inclusion of land in question in the Zonal Master Plan 2031.
17. Thereafter, on 04.01.2022, the Nagar Palika, Government of Rajasthan issued a letter thereby, granting/sanctioning converted land for the Tourism facility-Resort in an area of 1.30 hec out of area 5.90 hec. only.
18. On 03.06.2022, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the issue of eco sensitive zone at large passed several directions in the matter of titled as "T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Versus Union of India" being Writ Petition Civil No. 202 of 1995. 12
22. Following document has been filed and relied by the respondent nos. 8 & 9 -
i. Letter dated 21.01.2011 issued by the forest department issuing no objection certificate to the PP with the facts that the area does not fall within the forest area and it is at the distance of 150-300mtr away from the wildlife Khumbargarh and copy was sent to the District Collector with other officers.
ii. Vide order 01.02.2011, the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Khand Barli, has issued no objection certificate for the resort as narrated by the respondent.
iii. Vide order dated 01.02.2011, the Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department, has issued no objections certificate with certain conditions.
iv. On 31.07.2014 the office of the Public Works Department, District-
Pali, Rajasthan issued NOC for the resort.
v. Again vide letter dated 31.07.2014 the NOC was communicated to the District Collector, Pali, Rajasthan.
23. Further the matter was considered by the State Govt., Department of Forest and Sh. Yogender Kumar Dak, Secretary (Forest), State of Rajasthan issued letter dated 24.04.2018 with the facts that Rajasthan Tourism Policy, 2007, the application of Smt. Indu Kumari was considered and it was found that the area is outside of wildlife area and vide order issued by the Revenue Department area 1.30 ha. Was allotted to the applicant on 26.08.2011 and in view of the letter correspondence and pending applications the matter was considered by the State Govt. and exemption was allowed with the condition that the necessary permission from the State Pollution Control Board and other department should be taken for the purpose.
24. The State of Rajasthan vide letter dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure R/7) permitted the said project with the condition that rate of DLC + 20 % should be deposited in the state fund and that has been complied with. 13
25. It is further argued that the matter was taken up for consideration by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India reported in (2022) 10 Supreme Court Cases 544 where it was observed as follows :-
"e. In the event any activity is already being undertaken within the one kilometre or extended buffer zone (ESZ), as the case may be, of any wildlife sanctuary or national park which does not come within the ambit of prohibited activities as per the 09.02.2011 Guidelines, such activities may continue with permission of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests of each State or Union Territory and the person responsible for such activities in such a situation shall obtain necessary permission within a period of six months. Such permission shall be given once the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests is satisfied that the activities concerned do not come within the prohibited list and were continuing prior to passing of this order in a legitimate manner. No new permanent structure shall be permitted to come up for whatsoever purpose within the ESZ.
38. The MoEF&CC essentially has argued in favour of having ESZ to be site-specific and for that purpose they have invited proposals from individual State Government in the aforesaid Guidelines. In cases where such proposals have not come, they want 10 km periphery of protected forests to be preserved as ESZ, As regards activities permissible within the buffer zone, certain works have been proposed to be regulated and certain activities to be permitted within the ESZ. This has been stipulated in Annexure I to the Guidelines. We have already referred to the prohibited activates.
39. Among the regulated activities, as per these Guidelines are:-
i. Felling of trees with permission from appropriate authority.
ii. Establishment of hotels and resort as per approved master plan, which takes care of habitats allowing no restriction on movement of wild animals.
iii. Drastic change in agricultural system.14
iv. Commercial use of natural water resources including ground water harvesting as per approved master plan, which takes care of habitats allowing no restriction on movement of wild animals.
40. Within permissible activities fall :
i. Ongoing agricultural and horiculture 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.
26. And Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India finally directed as follows :-
56 We accordingly direct :
c. 56.1 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 prescribed and prescribed in the guidelines of 09.02.2011 shall be strictly adhered to . For Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary, it shall be 5000 m so far as subsisting activities are concerned.
56.2 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.
56.3 The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests as also the Home Secretary of each State and Union Territory shall remain responsible for proper complaisance 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 15 structures and other relevant details within the respective ESZs forthwith and a report shall be furnished before this Court by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests of each State and Union Territory within a period of three months. For this purpose, such authority shall be entitled to take assistance of any government agency for satellite imaging or photography using drones.
56.4 Mining within the national parks and wildlife sanctuaries shall not be permitted.
56.5 In the event any activity is already being undertaken within the one kilometre or extended buffer zone (ESZ), as the case may be, of any wildlife sanctuary or national park which does not come within the ambit of prohibited activities as per the 09.02.2011 Guidelines, such activities may continue with permission of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests of each State or Union Territory and the person responsible for such activities in such a situation shall obtain necessary permissions within a period of six months. Such permission shall be given once the principal Chief Conservator of Forests is satisfied that the activities concerned do not come within the prohibited list and were continuing prior to passing of this order in a legitimate manner. No new permanent structure shall be permitted to come up for whatsoever purpose within the ESZ.
56.6. The minimum width of the ESZ may be diluted in overwhelming public interest but for that purpose the State or Union Territory concerned shall approach CEC and MOEF&CC and both these bodies shall give their respective opinions/recommendations before this Court. On that basis, this Court shall pass appropriate order.
56.7. In the event CEC, MoEF&CC, the Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife or any other 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 CEC. In such a situation 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 the National 16 Board for Wildlife and then approach this Court with its recommendations.
56.8. In respect of sanctuaries or national parks for which the proposal of a State or Union Territory has not been given, the 10 km. buffer zone as ESZ.. as indicated in the order passed by this Court on 4-12-2006 in Goa Foundation and also contained in the Guidelines of 9-2-2011 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.
56.9. IA No. 1412 of 2005 and IA No. 117831 of 2019 do not relate to the issues involved in IA No. 1000 of 2003. These applications may be placed before the appropriate Bench to be heard independently.
56.10. For the same reason, IA 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.
56.11. The application of the State of Rajasthan registered as IA No. 3880 of 2015 relates to clarification of an order passed in Goa Foundation [WP (C) No. 460 of 2004). Let this application be placed before the Bench taking up the case of Goa Foundation.
56.12. LA No. 96949 of 2019 and 1A No. 65571 of 2021 are disposed of with directions that the MoEF&CC as also CEC shall proceed to take a decision in regard to the draft proposal for ESZ made by the State of Maharashtra to the extent of 0- 3.89 km and the MoEF&CC shall take final decision on that basis within a period of three months, if the said decision has not already been taken.
56.13. Prayers for impleadment of the applicants in IAs Nos:
984 of 2003, a 1026, 1123, 1197 and 1251 of 2004 are allowed. Necessary amendments may be carried out in these regards.
56.14. For the reasons already given, however, prayers of the applicants in IA's Nos. 982 of 2003, 1027, 1124, 1198. 1210, 1250 of 2004 and 1512 of 2006 are rejected.
56.15. CEC shall quantify the compensation to be recovered from each miner indulging in mining activities within the Jamua 17 Ramgarh Sanctuary in violation of any statutory provision or order of this Court. Specific recommendations for compensatory afforestation, reclamation, clearing overburden dumping as also compensation in monetary units for degradation of forest resources shall also be made. A further set of recommendations concerning confiscation of earth-moving equipments and other machineries lying within or in the periphery of the said sanctuary shall be made by CEC. Recommendations shall be made within a period of four months before this Court in the form of an application. This Court shall consider passing appropriate order upon going through such application. The exercise concerning such reparation, including quantifying compensation shall be undertaken upon giving the mining operator, State and MoEF&CC opportunity of hearing.
56.16. In the event there is any subsisting order of any High Court or any court subordinate to such High Court covering any of the issues dealt with by this Court in this order, this order shall prevail over any such order which may be contrary to these directions.
56.17. We have already observed that there are certain overlapping issues involved in this writ petition and the cases of Goa Foundation [Writ Petition (C) No. 460 of 2004] and [Writ Petition (C) No. 435 of 2012]. We request the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India to consider having the present writ petition e.
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad, In re v. Union of India; WP (C) No. 460 of 2004 (God Foundation y Union of India) as also WP(C) No. 435 of 2012 (Goa Foundation v. Union of India) be heard together before the same Bench. The Registry may place this order before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India."
31. The above matter was again challenged before the Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India for modification in I.A. Nos. 131377, 147102, 195467, 195468, 205092 of 2022, I.A. Nos. 162283 and 162284 of 2022 in I.A. D. No. 125746 of 2022 With I.A. Nos. 118604, 118606, 119400, 119401, 119404, 137132, 137138, 137140 and 137143 of 2022, I.A. Nos. 5764, 6804 and 10911 of 2023 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995 In Re: T.N. 18 Godavarman Thirumulpad Versus Union of India and Ors. and relevant portion are as follows :-
1. "The applicant specifically seeks modification of the directions contained in paragraphs 56.1 and 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra). The said paragraphs are reproduced herein below:
"56.1. 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 9-2-2011 shall be strictly adhered to. For Jamua Ramgarh Wildlife Sanctuary, it shall be 500 m so far as subsisting activities are concerned.
..........
56.5. In the event any activity is already being undertaken within the one kilometre or extended buffer zone (ESZ), as the case may be, of any wildlife sanctuary or national park which does not come within the ambit of prohibited activities as per the 9-2-2011 Guidelines, such activities may continue with permission of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests of each State or Union Territory and the person responsible for such activities in such a situation shall obtain necessary permission within a period of six months. Such permission shall be given once the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests is satisfied that the activities concerned do not come within the prohibited list and were continuing prior to passing of this order in a legitimate manner. No new permanent structure shall be permitted to come up for whatsoever purpose within the ESZ."
2. The clarification/modification of paragraph 56.1 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) is sought to the extent that the Eco-Sensitive Zones (for short, "ESZs") which have already been notified (final and draft) by the Ministry of Environment Forests and Climate Change (for short, "MoEF&CC") or the proposals for which have been received in the Ministry be exempted from the directions therein. The applicant also sought modification to the extent that paragraph 56.1 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) may not be made applicable where National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries are located along inter-State boundaries and/or common boundaries. Modification/clarification of 19 the directions in paragraph 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) in its entirety is additionally sought.
3. It is submitted that there cannot be a uniform boundary for all the National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. It is further submitted that there cannot also be a uniform boundary for a particular National Park or Wildlife Sanctuary. At times, it may be longer on one side and shorter on the other side depending on various circumstances.
4. It is submitted that the rights of the citizens who are residing in the Protected Areas are settled under the provisions of Sections 18 to 25A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "1972 Act") whereas there is no settlement of rights of citizens residing in ESZs. The citizens therein continue to reside and are also continuing with their daily avocation like farming etc. It is submitted that various developmental activities like construction of schools, dispensaries, anganwadis, public health centres etc. are required to be undertaken in such areas. Not only that, but if the direction not to make any construction is continued, the persons residing therein would not be in a position to construct or reconstruct houses on their own land. It is submitted that the procedure prescribed for obtaining the permission of the PCCF is very tedious. If such a direction is issued, the PCCF would be left with no other work but to consider the applications for continuation of such activities.
5. It could thus be seen that the Court has specifically observed that this Court had not passed any orders for implementation of the decision taken on 21st January 2002 to notify areas within 10 kilometres of the boundaries of National Parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries as ESZs with a view to conserve the forest, wildlife and environment. The Court therefore clarified that there is no direction, interim or final, prohibiting mining activities within 10 kilometres of the boundaries of National Parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries.
6. It will be relevant to refer to paragraphs 87.3 and 88.1 of the said order, which read thus:
20
"87.3. Until the order dated 4-8-2006 [T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, (2010) 13 SCC 740] of this Court is modified by this Court in IA No. 1000 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, there can be no mining activities within one kilometre from the boundaries of national parks and sanctuaries in Goa.
88.1. MoEF&CC will issue the notification of eco-sensitive zones around the national park and wildlife sanctuaries of Goa after following the procedure discussed in this judgment within a period of six months from today."
7. It can be seen that this Court has recorded the submissions of the learned ASG that there were 104 National Parks and 558 Wildlife Sanctuaries making a total of 662 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in the country. It was further recorded that the proposals for declaring areas around these National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries as ESZs had been received from the State Governments/Union Territories. It can further be seen that no proposals have been received in respect of 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. It further recorded that the proposals had been accepted and notification had been issued in respect of 289 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries as on 26th November 2018 and draft notification had been prepared in respect of 206 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. The Court therefore expected the MoEF & CC to actively pursue the preparation of the draft Notification and to issue a final Notification at the earliest. The Court then recorded 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries in respect of which proposals have not yet been received by the MoEF & CC alongside its anguish that though 12 years had been passed, no effective steps have been taken by the State Governments in respect of the National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries named in the said order. Therefore, the Court directed that an area of 10 kilometres around these 21 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries be declared as ESZs by the MoEF & CC. Liberty was granted to the State Governments to move an application for modification of the said order. However, it further directed that the application should be along with the proposal for declaration of ESZs.
8. It is to be noted that Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules prescribes a detailed procedure for issuing notification prohibiting or restricting various activities in the specified areas. The said power flows from Sections 21 3(v) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "1986 Act").
9. A perusal of clause (viii) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules would reveal that one of the factors that has to be taken into consideration for declaring ESZ is the proximity to a sanctuary, National Park, game reserve or closed area notified, as such under the 1972 Act. Sub-rule 3(a) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules requires that whenever it appears to the Central Government that it is expedient to impose prohibition or restrictions, it is required to give notice of its intention to do so by notification in the Official Gazette and in such other manner as the Central Government may deem necessary from time to time. As per sub-rule 3(b) of Rule 5, every such notification is required to give a brief description of the area, the industries, operations processes in that area about which such notification pertains and also specify the reasons for the imposition of prohibition or restrictions on the location of the industries on carrying out of the processes or operations in that area. Accordingly, as per sub-rule 3(c) of Rule 5, any person interested in filing an objection is entitled to file an objection to the Central Government within sixty days from the date of publication in the notification in the Official Gazette. The Central Government thereafter within the prescribed period provided under clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules is required to issue a notification in the Official Gazette imposing such prohibition or restrictions in an area. This is required to be done only after considering all the objections received under clause (c) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules. It can thus be seen that a detailed procedure is prescribed under the 1986 Rules for notifying ESZs.
10. It is to be noted that MoEF & CC has issued the said Guidelines for declaration of ESZs around the National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
11. The said Guidelines refer to a meeting of the Indian Board for Wildlife held on 21st January 2002, in which "Wildlife Conservation Strategy- 2002" was adopted. Point No. 9 of the said Strategy envisaged that lands falling within 10 kilometres of the boundaries of National Parks and Sanctuaries should be notified as eco-fragile zones under Section 3(v) of the 1972 Act and clause (viii) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules. It further states that when the views were obtained from all the State Governments, some of the State Governments had raised concern over applicability of 10 kilometres range from the Protected 22 Area boundary and informed that most of the human habitation and other areas including important cities in these States would come under the purview of ESZs and will adversely affect the development. The said Guidelines also refer to the National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016). The NBWL, in its meeting held on 17th March 2005, decided that the delineation of ESZs would have to be site specific and relate to regulation rather than prohibition of specific activities. The said decision was communicated to all the State Governments for compliance vide letter dated 27th May 2005.
12. The said Guidelines thereafter refer to the directions of this Court dated 4th December 2006. It also refers to the statutory provisions as contained in Section 5C (1) of the 1972 Act, Section 3 of the 1986 Act and Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules. The said Guidelines state that the purpose of declaring ESZs 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. It also reiterates the decision of the NBWL that the activities in the ESZs would be of a regulatory nature rather than prohibitive nature unless and otherwise so required. Paragraph 4 of the said Guidelines notes that many of the existing Protected Areas have already undergone tremendous development in close vicinity to their boundaries. It refers to the Guindy National Park, Tamil Nadu, Sanjay Gandhi National Park, Maharashtra, etc. and notes that the Protected Areas are lying in the urban set up. It therefore observes that defining the extent of ESZs around Protected Areas will have to be kept flexible and Protected Area specific. It notes that the width of ESZs and type of regulations will differ from one Protected Area to another Protected Area. It however notes that, as a general principle, the width of the ESZs could go up to 10 kilometres around a Protected Area as provided in the Wildlife Conservation Strategy-2002. It further notes that in case where sensitive corridors, connectivity and ecologically important patches, crucial for landscape linkage, are even beyond 10 kilometres width, these should be included in the ESZs. It further notes that even in context of a particular Protected Area, the distribution of an area of the ESZ and the extent of regulation may not be uniform all around and it could be of variable width and extent. The said Guidelines notes that though the directions were issued by this Court to all the States/Union Territories, except a few States, several other States/Union Territories have not come forward with the proposals for declaration of ESZs. It 23 was observed that this could be perhaps for want of guidelines in this regard. It further notes that this Court in its judgment and order dated 3rd December 2010 in a case relating to construction of park at Noida near Okhla Bird Sanctuary, observed that the ESZs around the Protected Areas had not been notified as the Government of India had not issued any guidelines in this regard.
13. A list of the activities which are prohibited, regulated and permitted is contained in Annexure-I of the said Guidelines, which reads thus:
Sl. Activity Prohibited Regulated Permitted Remarks No
1. Commercial Y Regulation sill not prohibit mining the digging of earth for construction or repair of houses for manufacture of country tiles or bricks for housing for personal.
2. Felling of trees Y With permission from appropriate authority
3. Setting of Saw Y mills
4. Setting of Y industries causing pollution (Water, Air, Soil., Noise, etc.)
5. Establishment Y As per approved master of hotels plan, which takes care of and resorts Habitats allowing no restriction on movement of wild animals.
6. Commercial Y For hotels and other use of firewood business related establishment
7. Drastic change Y of agriculture systems
8. Commercial Y As per approved master use of natural plan, which takes care of water resources Habitats allowing no including restriction on movement of ground water wild animals.
harvesting
9. Establishment Y of major hydroelectric projects
10. Erection of Y Promote underground Electrical cable Cabling
11. Ongoing Y However, excessive Agriculture and expansion of some of Horticulture these activities should be practices local regulated as per the communities master plan
12. Rain Water Y Should be actively harvesting Promoted
13. Fencing of Y premises of hotels and lodges
14. Organic farming Y Should be actively promoted 24
15. Use of Y polythene bags by shopkeepers
16. Use of Y Should be actively renewable promoted energy sources
17. Widening of Y This should be done with roads proper EIA and mitigation measures
18. Movement of Y For commercial purpose vehicular traffic at night
19. Introduction of Y exotic species
20. Use of Y production of any hazardous substances
21. Undertaking activities related to tourism like over-flying the National Park are by any aircraft, hot-air balloons
22. Protection of hill Y As per the master plan slopes and river Banks
23. Discharge of Y effluents and solid waste in Natural water bodies or Terrestrial are
24. Air and Y vehicular pollution
25. Sign board & Y As per the master plan hoardings
26. Adoption of Y Should be actively green promoted.
technology for
all activities
14. In the application filed by the Union of India, various illustrations have been given to point out as to how if the directions issued in paragraph 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) are not modified, a severe hardship would be caused to the millions of people.
We refer to the same hereunder:
i. "The ESZ around Nagarjunasagar Srisailam Tiger Reserve in Andhra Pradesh extends from 0 to 26 kilometres and 100 villages are situated within it (Zero extent of ESZ is due to Krishna River and interstate boundary with Telangana);
ii. The ESZ around Valmiki Wildlife Sanctuary, Valmiki National Park and Valmiki Tiger Reserve in Bihar 25 extends from 0 to 9 kilometres and 323 villages are situated within it (zero extent of ESZ is towards Western side sharing inter-state boundaries with Uttar Pradesh and towards Northern side sharing international boundary with Nepal);
iii. The ESZ around Betla National Park, Palamau Wildlife Sanctuary, and Mahuadanr Wolf Sanctuary in Jharkhand extends from 0 to 9 kilometres and 382 villages are situated within it (Zero extent of ESZ is due to Inter-State boundary);
iv. The ESZ around Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnataka extends from 1 to 14.5 kilometres and 107 villages are situated within it;
v. The ESZ around Kanha National Park and Phen Wildlife Sanctuary in Madhya Pradesh extends from 0 to 30 kilometres and 168 villages are situated within it (Zero extent of Eco-sensitive Zone is towards the eastern side having interstate boundary with Chhattisgarh); vi. The ESZ around Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve in Maharashtra extends from 3 to 6 kilometres and 150 villages are situated within it;
vii. The ESZ around Jaisamand Wildlife Sanctuary in Rajasthan extends from 1.6 to 8.9 kilometres and 83 villages are situated in it;
viii. Even a small ESZ such as the one around Keoladeo National Park in Rajasthan which extends from 0.5 to 1.5 kilometres has 22 villages situated in it."
15. It would thus reveal that in the ESZ around Nagarjunasagar Srisailam Tiger Reserve in Andhra Pradesh, 100 villages are situated within it. In the ESZ around Valmiki Wildlife Sanctuary, Valmiki National Park and Valmiki Tiger Reserve in Bihar, 323 villages are situated within it. In the ESZ around Betla National Park, Palamau Wildlife Sanctuary, and Mahuadanr Wolf Sanctuary in Jharkhand, 382 villages are situated within it. In the ESZ around Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnataka, 107 villages are situated within it. In the ESZ around Kanha National Park and Phen Wildlife Sanctuary in Madhya Pradesh, 168 villages are situated within it. In the ESZ around Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve in Maharashtra, 150 villages are situated within it. In the ESZ 26 around Jaisamand Wildlife Sanctuary in Rajasthan, 83 villages are situated in it.
16. If the direction as issued by this Court in paragraph 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) is continued, then no permanent structure would be permitted to come up for whatsoever purpose in the aforesaid ESZs. As already pointed out from the aforesaid examples, hundreds of villages are situated within the ESZs in the country. If no permanent construction is to be permitted for any purpose, a villager who is desirous to reconstruct his house would not be permitted. Similarly, if there is an extension in their family and some additional construction is required for accommodating the enlarged family, the same would also not be permitted. Similarly, if the Government decides to construct schools, dispensaries, anganwadis, village stores, water tanks and other basic structures for improvement of the life of the villagers, the same would also not be permitted. The effect of the order will be to prevent the State or the Central Government from constructing roads and provide other facilities to the villagers.
17. If the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) is not modified, it will also be impossible for the Forest Departments to conduct eco-development activities around National Parks and Sanctuaries. The said activities are required with the dual objectives of protection of wildlife and provision of benefits for the local communities. MoEF & CC provides financial assistance to the States under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme-Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats, which includes assistance for eco-development activities. These activities often involve construction of small structures which are permanent in nature in areas including ESZs. For example, the said activities which are likely to be prohibited are thus:
i. The construction of community halls, bridges, threshing floors, fish-drying platforms, drinking water storage, etc., for the benefit of local communities/villages; ii. The construction of forest chowkies, watch towers, and other structures for protection of wildlife and forests; iii. The construction of interpretation centres, toilets and other basic structures for the environmental education of visitors to National Parks and sanctuaries.
18. It is further to be noted that there are various regulated and permissible activities. There are also certain projects of national and 27 strategic importance such as construction of National Highways, Railways, Defense related infrastructure etc. The effect of the direction in 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) is that all such activities will be permanently prohibited. In this respect, it is to be noted that MoEF&CC has issued an Office Memorandum dated 17 th May 2022 which required that any activity listed in Schedule of the EIA Notification 2006, when conducted in a notified ESZs, or in the case of National Parks and Sanctuaries for which no ESZ has been finally notified, when conducted within 10 kilometres of such National Park or Sanctuary, requires the consideration and recommendation of the NBWL or its Standing Committee in addition to the Environment Clearance under the 1986 Act. Additionally, activities which are regulated as per the specific ESZ notification require approval as per that notification. As such, we find that there are inbuilt safeguards for preventing rampant construction and abuse of process which may be detrimental to the development and maintenance of wildlife habitats. It is further to be noted that if the direction as contained in paragraph 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) that even for continuation of existing activities, the permission of the PCCF of each State or Union Territory would be necessary, remains unmodified, taking into consideration that in each State or Union Territory there will be hundreds of villages wherein millions of people would be residing, the PCCF would be left with no other job except to consider such applications for permission to continue such activities. Even a farmer desirous to continue farming activities would be required to seek such permission. We find that such a direction is impossible to be implemented.
19. We are of the view that if such a direction is continued, rather than avoiding man-animal conflict, it will intensify the same. As observed in the said Guidelines, the requirement of declaring ESZs is not to hamper day to day activities of the citizens but is meant to protect the precious forests/Protected Areas from any negative impact, and to refine the environment around the Protected Areas.
20. It is further to be noted that on the date of filing of the present application, final notifications have been issued in respect of 474 Protected Areas whereas draft notifications have been issued in respect of 102 Protected Areas. 73 proposals are pending. As already discussed hereinabove, this Court has already found the said Guidelines to be reasonable and has accepted the same. The Court 28 has also accepted the view of the Standing Committee of the NBWL that uniform guidelines may not be possible in respect of each Sanctuary or National Park for maintaining ESZs. Though the Court has observed that a minimum width of one kilometre in ESZ ought to be maintained, in paragraph 56.6 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) itself, it has observed that minimum width of the ESZ may be diluted in overwhelming public interest but for that purpose the State or Union Territory concerned is required to approach Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and MoEF & CC. It has further observed that both these bodies shall give their respective recommendations before this Court and on that basis, the Court should pass appropriate order.
21. As already discussed hereinabove, the ESZs are required to be notified after following the procedure as prescribed under the 1986 Rules and the said Guidelines. Such notifications cannot be issued unless a close scrutiny at various levels including the scrutiny by Expert Committee consisting of experts from 13 organizations. As such, we find that the direction as contained in paragraph 56.6 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) also needs to be modified.
22. Insofar as the restriction on mining is concerned, we are of the considered view that it has been the consistent view of this Court that the mining activities within an area of one kilometre of the boundary of the Protected Areas will be hazardous for the wildlife. Though in the case of Goa Foundation (supra), the said directions were issued in respect of State of Goa, we find that such directions need to be issued on Pan-India basis.
23. We are therefore inclined to allow the present I.A. The direction in paragraph 56.1 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) is modified and clarified that the directions contained therein would not be applicable to the ESZs in respect of which a draft and final notification has been issued by the MoEF & CC and in respect of the proposals which have been received by the Ministry.
24. We, however, direct the Central Government that wide publicity should be given to the draft notification which is required to be published under the provisions of clause (a) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules. We further direct that the final notification to be published under clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the 1986 Rules shall not be given effect for a period of 30 days from the date of issuance thereof.29
25. It is further directed that any person who is aggrieved with such a final notification would be entitled to approach this Court directly by filing an application in the present proceedings.
26. We further clarify that the direction contained in paragraph 56.1 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) would not be applicable where the National Parks and Sanctuaries are located on inter-State borders and/or share common boundaries.
27. We also modify the direction contained in paragraph 56.4 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) and direct that mining within the National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary and within an area of one kilometre from the boundary of such National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary shall not be permissible.
28. We also modify the directions contained in paragraph 56.5 of the order dated 3rd June 2022 (supra) and replace the same as under:
i. The MoEF & CC and all the State/Union Territory Governments shall strictly follow the provisions in the said Guidelines dated 9th February 2011 and so also the provisions contained in the ESZs notifications pertaining to the respective Protected Areas with regard to prohibited activities, regulated activities and permissible activities;
ii. We further direct that while granting Environmental and Forest Clearances for project activities in ESZ and other areas outside the Protected Areas, the Union of India as well as various State/Union Territory Governments shall strictly follow the provisions contained in the Office Memorandum dated 17th May 2022 issued by MoEF&CC."
27. In view of the above order learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the directions issued in para 56 of the order dated 03.06.2022 in .N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India case referred above was modified vide order dated 26.04.2023 and at present the order passed by the Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India dated 26.04.2023 is law of the land and respondents have to comply the orders. In case the notification has not been 30 finalised the Hon'ble the Supreme Court has directed that the central govt.
could by publication invite public views and any one aggrieved with such a notification would be entitled to file the objections and suggestions and after final notification may approach to the Hon'ble the Supreme Court for finality of the matter.
28. In the matter of Goa foundation the mining activities within the area of 1 km has been found to be hazardous for the wildlife and it is totally prohibited.
29. Rest of the activities with regard to the matters affecting the local residents must be considered by the competent committee while considering the application of the local residents. Relying of the said judgment the Learned Counsel for the Respondent has submitted that if any activity is already being undertaken within 1 km or extended buffer zone and which does not come within the ambit of prohibited activities, as per the guidelines such activities may continue with the permission of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests of each State and the person responsible for such activities in such a situation shall obtain necessary permission within a period specified in the guidelines. The guidelines further provides that such permission shall be given once the PCCF is satisfied that the activities concerned do not come within the prohibited list and were continuing prior to passing of the order dated 03.06.2022 in a legitimate manner.
30. It is further argued that the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 provides the determination of the rights of the affected persons to be finally settled under Section 19 to 24 by the state govt and till such time as the rights are settled, the state govt. shall make alternative arrangements. The relevant portions of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 are quoted below :-
"Section 18 A - Protection to Sanctuaries-31
(2) Till such time as the rights of affected persons are finally settled under sections 19 to 24 (both inclusive), the State Government shall make alternative arrangements required for making available fuel, fodder and other forest produce to the persons affected, in terms of their rights as per the Government records.] Appointment of Collectors. 1[18B. Appointment of Collectors.-- The State Government shall appoint, an officer to act as Collector under the Act, within ninety days of coming into force of the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002 (16 of 2003), or within thirty days of the issue of notification under section 18, to inquire into and determine the existence, nature and extent of rights of any person in or over the land comprised within the limits of the sanctuary which may be notified under sub-section (1) of section 18.] Section- 19 - Collector to determine rights.
2[When a notification has been issued under section 18,] the Collector shall inquire into, and determine, the existence, nature and extent of the rights of any person in or over the land comprised within the limits of the sanctuary.
Section-20 - Bar of accrual of rights.
After the issue of a notification under section 18, no right shall be acquired in, on or over the land comprised within the limits of the area specified in such notification, except by succession, testamentary or intestate.
Section-21 - Proclamation by Collector.
When a notification has been issued under section 18, the Collector shall 3[within a period of sixty days] publish in the regional language in every town and village in or in the neighbourhood of the area comprised therein, a proclamation--
(a) specifying, as nearly as possible, the situation and the limits of the sanctuary; and
(b) requiring any person, claiming any right mentioned In section 19, to prefer before the Collector, within two 1 Ins. by Act 16 of 2003, s. 11 (w.e.f. 1-4-2003).
2
1. Subs. by Act 44 of 1991, s. 16, for "Whenever any area is declared to be a sanctuary" (w.e.f. 2-10-1991). 3
1. Ins. by Act 16 of 2003, s. 12 (w.e.f. 1-4-2003). 32 months from the date of such proclamation, a written claim in the prescribed form, specifying the nature and extent of such right with necessary details and the amount and particulars of compensation, if any, claimed in respect thereof.
Section-22 - Inquiry by Collector.
The Collector shall, after service of the prescribed notice upon the claimant, expeditiously inquire into--
(a) the claim preferred before him under clause (b) of section 21, and
(b) the existence of any right mentioned in section 19 and not claimed under clause (b) of section 21, so far as the same may be ascertainable from the records of the State Government and the evidence of any person acquainted with the same.
Section-23 - Powers of Collector.
For the purpose of such inquiry, the Collector may exercise the following powers, namely:--
(a) the power to enter in or upon any land and to survey, demarcate and make a map of the same or to authorise any other officer to do so;
(b) the same powers as are vested in a civil court for the trial of suits.
Section-24 - Acquisition of rights.
(1) In the case of a claim to a right in or over any land referred to in section 19, the Collector shall pass an order admitting or rejecting the same in whole or in part.
(2) If such claim is admitted in whole or in part, the Collector may either--
(a) exclude such land from the limits of the proposed sanctuary, or
(b) proceed to acquire such land or rights, except where by an agreement between the owner of such land or holder of 33 rights and the Government, the owner or holder of such rights has agreed to surrender his rights to the Government, in or over such land" and on payment of such compensation, as is provided in the 4[Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013).] 5[(c) allow, in consultation with the Chief Wild Life Warden, the continuation of any right of any person in or over any land within the limits of the sanctuary.] Section-25 - Acquisition proceedings.
(1) For the purpose of acquiring such land, or rights in or over such land,
(a) the Collector shall be deemed to be a Collector, proceeding under the 6[Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013);]
(b) the claimant shall be deemed to be a person interested and appearing before him in pursuance of a notice given under 7[section 21ic] of that Act;
(c) the provisions of the sections, preceding 8[section 21] of that Act, shall be deemed to have been complied with;
(d) where the claimant does not accept the award made in his favour ha the matter of compensation, he shall be deemed, within the meaning of 3[section 64] of that Act, to be a person interested who has not accepted the award, and shall be entitled to proceed to claim relief against the award under the provisions of 9[Chapter VIII] of that Act;
(e) the Collector, with the consent of the claimant, or 10[the Authority], with the consent of both the parties, may 4 Sub. by Act 18 of 2022, s. 8, for "Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894)" (w.e.f. 1-4-2023). 5 Ins. by Act 44 of 1991, s. 17 (w.e.f. 2-10-1991). 6 Subs. by Act 18 of 2022, s. 9, for "Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894)" (w.e.f. 1-4-2023). 7 Subs. by s. 9, ibid., for "ection 9" (w.e.f. 1-4-2023). 8 Subs. by s. 9, ibid., for "section 18" and "Part III" (w.e.f. 1-4-2023). 9 Subs. by s. 9, ibid., for "the Court" (w.e.f. 1-4-2023). 10 Ins. by s. 9, ibid, (w.e.f. 1-4-2023).
34
award compensation in land or money or partly in land and partly in money; and
(f) in the case of the stoppage of a public way or a common pasture, the Collector may, with the previous sanction of the State Government, provide for an alternative public way or common pasture, as far as may be practicable or convenient.
5[Explanation.--The expression "Authority" referred to in clause (e), shall mean the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority established under section 51 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013).] (2) The acquisition under this Act of any land or interest therein shall be deemed to be acquisition for a public purpose."
31. It is further argued that the rights of the citizens who are residing in the protected area are settled under the provision of Section 18 to Section 25A of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, whereas there is no settlement of rights of citizens residing in the eco-sensitive zones. The citizens therein continues to reside and or also continuing with their daily allocation i.e. farming etc.
32. It is further submitted that various development activities i.e. constructions of schools, dispensaries, anganwadis, public health centre etc. are a required to be undertaken in such areas. Not only that but if the directions not to make any construction is continued the persons residing therein could not be in a position to construct or reconstruct houses on their own land and to achieve this purpose Section 36B provides the constitution of conservation reserve management committee and Section 36C provides for management for communities reserve and community reserve management committee.
35
33. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Govt. of Rajasthan and the District Magistrate, Pali, Rajasthan/ respondent no. 6 are that :-
1. "That the Respondent No. 4 and 6 acted in accordance with law and procedure in the present case. It is respectfully submitted that Respondent No. 4 granted sanction of allotment on 26.08.2011 for construction of resort/ tourism unit in view of Rajasthan Tourism Unit Policy, 2007. It is pertinent to note that the allotment sanction was made after the Forest Department issuing NOC on 21.01.2011 noting that the area in question falls outside the ESZ, as well as PWD& the Water Department issuing NOCs on 01.02.2011 concerning the said land.
2. Thereafter, in accordance with the then existing rules and regulations, Respondent No. 4 revoked the sanction of allotment on 12.10.2015.True Copy of communication by Joint Secretary, Revenue Department, Rajasthan Government to District Collector, Pali (Respondent No. 6) dated 12.10.2015 recording about revocation of sanction of allotment dated 26.08.2011 is annexed.
3. Vide a communication dated 01.06.2018 issued by the Revenue Department (Group 3) which placed its reliance on a communication dated 28.11.2011 issued by Department of Town Planning, Jodhpur recording the concerned land is located within the periphery of Nagar Palika, Sadri, Rajasthan. The said letter further records that no action was expected concerning the land in issue either by Respondent No. 4 or 6.
4. In view of the said factual backdrop, the Respondent No. 6 passed an order dated 11.06.2018 and transferred various lands including the concerned land to Nagar Palika, Sadri, Rajasthan on the basis of notification dated 08.12.2010 issued by the Revenue Department (Group 6).
5. As is apparent from the record, that the Forest Department, Rajasthan granted conditional NOC dated 24.04.2018 to Respondent No.8. The Forest Department clearly noted that the land in question was within the 1 Km boundary of the sanctuary and thus, was an Eco Sensitive Zone under the State Government's notification dated 13.05.2016. The forest 36 Department directed the Respondent No. 8 to take all necessary clearances/permissions from the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board and other concerned departments.
6. That the present case was considered by the Screening Committee of the department of Local Self Government (LSG) in its meeting held on 01.07.2021 and grant of NOC by the Forest Department to the Respondent No. 8 was examined and found to be valid.
7. Thereafter, the Ministerial Empowered Committee in its meeting 06.12.2021 has upheld the decision of the Screening Committee dated 07.07.2021. It is pertinent to highlight that after 12.10.2015, Respondent No. 4 had no role to play pertaining to the land in question. Moreover, vide order dated 11.06.2018, the Respondent No. 6 establishes that the said land in question was transferred to Local Self Government and does not fall under Revenue Department."
34. Learned counsel for the state has further pressed the Rajasthan Tourism Unit Policy - 2007 which provides the allotment of land for construction of tourism unit and relevant directions and policy as taken by the State of Rajasthan are as follows :-
"Establishment and development of all types of Tourism Units, including all types of Hotels State Govt. would make available land as per following procedure:-
a. Jaipur Development Authority, UIT, Municipal Bodies, Gram Panchayat and District Collectors would identify suitable land for the establishment of Tourism units in which hotels are also included. Such land bank will be reserved for all categories of Hotels and Tourism Units such as:-
1-Budget Hotels (1,2 & 3 Stars) 2-4 Star Hotels 3-5 Star & 5 Star Deluxe Hotels 4-Other Tourism Units 37 b. Information of such Land Bank would be made available on the website of the Tourism Department and that of concerned Local Body/ District Collector.
c. The maximum and minimum land area to be reserved for different categories of Hotels as well as other tourism units shall be as under:-
S. Category Minimum Land Area Maximum Land
No. Area
(1) Budget Hotels (1, 2 & Up to 1200 sq. mtrs. Up to 4000 sq.
3 Star) mtrs.
(2) 4 Star Hotels Up to 6000 sq. mtrs. Up to 12000 sq.
mtrs.
(3) 5 Star & Deluxe upto 18000 Sq. mtrs. Up to 40,000 sq.
Category mtrs.
(4) Other tourism unit - as per
requirement /
availability
(3) 5 Star & Deluxe upto 18000 Sq. mtrs. Up to 40,000 sq.
Category mtrs.
(4) Other tourism unit - as per
requirement /
availability
2. (a) As specified at point no. (1)(a) Local bodies / Panchayats / District Collectors, shall identify and reserve land on Special Reserve Price for hotels and other tourism units. For hotels and other tourism units, special reserve prices will be fixed in relation to present commercial reserve price of the local area as under:-
Hotel Category Minimum Special Reserve Price
(i) One Star 10 Percent of the commercial reserve price (2) Two Star 20 Percent of the commercial reserve price (3) Three Star 30 Percent of the commercial reserve price (4) Four Star 45 Percent of the commercial reserve price (5) Five Star 50 Percent of the commercial reserve price (6) Other Tourism Unit 50 Percent of the commercial reserve price This special reserve price shall be the base price for disposal of identified and reserved lands through a process of competitive bidding. The Local Bodies / District Collectors shall notify the special reserve price of various identified land sites for tourism unit projects on their websites and also on the website of Department of Tourism. But the special reserve price shall not be 38 less than the residential reserved price of that specific area. In compliance of new policy, Urban Governance and Revenue Departments shall amend their respective rules as indicated above.
(b) The process of competitive bidding and allotment for such reserveHotel lands with "Special Reserve Price"
shall be as follows:-
i. The Local Bodies shall notify through public advertisement for sale and disposal of lands identified and reserved for hotels and other tourism units through competitive bidding. The Special Reserve Price for sale / disposal shall be indicated in the advertisement and this price shall be the base price for disposal of land through competitive bidding.
ii. Concerned Local Body / Panchayats / District Collectors shall regularly take action for the disposal of the available land, through public advertisement. In case more than one applicant applies for the land within the specified time period, the sale / disposal of land shall be done through competitive bidding. In case no application is received in the specified time period, than allotment of land, shall be made to the single bidder on special reserve price, as per the other provisions of the Tourism Unit Policy iii. In case of above 2 b (i) and 2 b (ii), the Local Body / Panchayats / District Collectors shall ensure applicability of pre-qualification of bidders who are allowed to bid for the hotel land or the single applicant / bidder who is considered for allotment of land at Special Reserve Price. The Local Bodies / Panchayats / District Collectors shall also ensure that the successful bidder in the competitive bidding process or the single bidder / applicant (who has been considered for allotment of the land on Special Reserve Price) shall provide a "Performance Guarantee" equivalent to 10% of the project cost. Commercial activities on such land shall be 39 restricted to a maximum of 15% of constructed area.
iv. The following eligibility criteria is laid down for being eligible for bidding and applying for hotel / tourism units land under this policy
1. No conditions for Budget Hotel ( for 1,2 and 3 Star Category hotels)
2. For 4 Star and above - The bidder / applicant should be a Hotelier / Tour Operator / involved in the field of tourism. In case the applicant does not have the above eligibility, then a tie up with a consortium with one of the members having the desired eligibility conditions can be considered.
3. Land made available under this policy cannot be used for any other purpose for 30 years.
(3) Conversion of Agricultural Land in urban areas
(i) Conversion of agricultural land in urban areas have been done under Section 90'B' of Rajasthan Land-Revenue Act, 1956. Required orders are passed by concerned Local Body viz Jaipur Development Authority / UIT / Municipal Bodies.
Presently for the establishment of Hotel and other tourism units, since there is no separate category, conversion is done in the commercial category. Recently, State Government has launched a new Township Policy vide Notification No. F19(1)UD/3/2002 dt. 29.03.2007. As per para no. A(13), a provision has been made for conversion of agricultural land in to non-
agricultural land for different proposes. In this Policy commercial conversion of agricultural land @ of Rs. 400 /- per sq.mtr. in Jaipur City and different rates for other cities, have been made applicable. There is no separate rate for Hotel and other Tourism Units. Generally hotels are considered to be in commercial category. As such it is proposed to assign a subcategory in the commercial category, for hotels and tourism 40 units, so that there is no ambiguity in land conversion for commercial lands and Hotels.
(ii) The State Govt. intends to provide full relaxation to Hotels and other tourism units for conversion from agricultural land, therefore sr. no. 3 in the table given below para no. A(13) of the Township Policy, a new provision would be included by which conversion charges / fees would be exempted for establishment of hotels and other tourism units from agricultural land.
S. Use City (amount in rupees per sq. yard)
No.
Jaipur Divisional Cities Towns with
Headqtrs. having population
(Except population less than
Bharatpur) one lac + one lac
3. Agricultural to Nil Nil Nil Nil
Hotel
(Tourism Unit) in a
township or
independent plot)
(i) Similarly as per para no. C/6 of above
notification, development fees are also imposed, which have been determined as Rs. 200/- per Sqr. yard in Jaipur and in other cities Rs.
150/100 per sqr. yard. Under this Tourism Unit Policy, provision for abolition of the charges are also being proposed by adding new proviso (iv) to para 6/c of the new Tourism Policy as under :-
(ii) Hotels and other Tourism Units - Nil
(4) For conversion of agricultural land into
non-agricultural land in Rural areas.
Under Rule-7 of Rajasthan Land revenue (conversion of agricultural land for non-agricultural purpose in Rural areas) Rules, 2007, provision for conversion for different purpose has been made and Rule 8 mentions about provisions for relaxation. As per provisions of Sub Rule(2) & (4) of Rule 8 a maximum area of 2000 sqr. mtrs and 1200 sqr. mtrs for Tourism Units 41 and Hotels has been made. Similarly in Sub-Rule (3) & (5) 50 % exemption in fees has been made. It is proposed that in rural areas for different types of hotels and other tourism units full exemption from agricultural land conversion fees will now be made, for which necessary amendment in Rule 8 will be made as under :-
The amended Rule-8 of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Conversion of Agricultural Land for Non-Agricultural Purposed in Rural Areas) Rules, 2007 is proposed to be as under -
8. "Exemption of Conversion Charges -
(1) No conversion charges shall be payable by any department of State Government or a local authority for conversion of land for non-
agricultural purpose for any official use. (2) No conversion charges, as prescribed in Rule-7, shall be payable where a tenant desires to establish a hotel or any other tourism unit as defined in Rule 2 (r) on the land held by him, upto 31st March, 2010."
5. Regarding conversion of residential land and heritage properties into Hotels and other tourism units In Rajasthan Municipal Corporation (Land-
Utilization Conversion) Rule, 2000, provisions for conversion of residential land into commercial and other purposes, have been made and definition of commercial, residential and industrial land -
utilization has been given. In Rule 12, provision for conversion of non-commercial land for commercial purpose has been made on 40% of the reserve residential price. As per these provisions any residential land or building used for hotels shall be converted on the 40% residential reserve price. All such heritage properties forts, palaces are also covered in this 42 category and in case of establishing hotels in such heritage properties, developer has to deposit conversion charges as per provision of the Rule-12.
In Rajasthan presently there are many havelis, forts and palaces in heritage category that can be developed into hotels, which would be of special attraction to tourists. This would not only increase the tourist arrivals in the state but also promote the culture of Rajasthan. Hence for this, in Rule- 12(i) the following proviso shall be added :-
(i) that any heritage property such as havelis, forts, palaces, hunting lodges etc, which have been constructed prior to 1950, and are proposed to be utilized for conversion / construction into heritage hotels having minimum of 10 rooms shall be exempted from above mentioned fees.
(ii) provided further that if any residential land or residential buidling is proposed to be used for hotels or other tourism units, having minimum of 10 rooms, shall be exempted from above mentioned fees.
Provided further that for other tourism units and camping sites or tents etc, restriction of 10 rooms will not be applicable.
6. Regularization There are some heritage properties and residential land and buildings which are running as hotels or other tourism units without permission and are also operational. Under new policy, new hotels and tourism units will be fully exempted from land conversion charges. If land and buildings are being used as Hotels and tourism units without prior permission, the same shall be regularized 43 under Rule-12 of Rajasthan Municipality (Land- use conversion) Rule - 2000 on the basis of merits as per new clauseof Rule-12 on payment of 25% of regularization fees.
7. F.A.R. Presently there is provision of 1.75 FAR in JDA area and other urban areas, which has been doubled by Urban Governance Department order dt. 19.02.07 in new developed and New Township areas, subject to condition that overall FAR of the Township area shall not exceed 1 (one). FAR for Hotels already established would be increased from 1.75 to 2.0 to allow construction of an additional floor. But in both circumstances, land coverage area shall be similar to previous permissible area.
But in such cases only rooms would be permitted for construction rather than restaurant, bar or banquet hall etc.
8. Other such policy matters which are related to Hotels and other Tourism units and which are not covered in this Tourism Unit Policy-2007, will be put up through nodal department on the basis of merits to BIDI for appropriate decision.
9. All concessions available in Rajasthan Investment Policy Scheme 2003, shall also be available to all tourism units.
10. Nodal Department For infrastructural development of all tourism units, Tourism Department shall work as Nodal Department.
35. Being a policy decision the Director and Special Secretary, Local Self Government, Rajasthan vide decision taken in the meeting on 07.07.2021 44 referred the matter to the cabinet sub-committee for consideration and cabinet empowered committee vide its meeting dated 29.09.2021 took a decision to allot the land on the rate of DLS + 20% to the respondent/PP and authorised Municipal Corporation, Sadadi for allotment of the land after completion of certain formalities in favour or respondents/PP.
36. It is further submitted on 24.04.2018 the Forest Department, Rajasthan granted no objection of the tourism department for tourism resort purpose after discussing the issue of land in question and observed that the land in question has been exempted for the tourist resort facility and on 25.07.2018 the Senior Town Planner, Jodhpur Zone further issued letter to Nagar Palika, Sadadi and on 04.01.2022 the Nagar Palika, govt. of Rajasthan issued a letter granting/sanctioning converted land for the tourism facility resort and a right of the respondent has been created by a decision taken by the state government.
37. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied on the notification dated 13.05.2016 issued by Govt. of Rajasthan, Department of Forest whereby direction has been issued for protection of Tiger Reserve, Ranthambor and specifies a protected area but in this notification the notes no. 1 provides that the order shall not apply to the conversion/construction of the resort for which no objection certificate has been issued by the forest department prior to 31.05.2015. In other cases of the resorts no conversion/construction shall be permitted without obtaining a specific approval of the State Govt. granting exemption from the issue order.
38. The Municipal Corporation, Sadadi published a public notice dated 05.07.2018 inviting objections which was published the copy of the relevant papers are attached with this application and after that the sale deed has been executed in favour of respondent by the competent authority.
39. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the Project Proponent has not obtained necessary permission from the authorities concerned and further that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in T.N. Godavarman 45 Thirumulpad vs Union of India WPC No. 202/ 1995, decided on 3.6.2022 has prescribed certain guidelines which has not been followed. The above guidelines issued by the Supreme Court as narrated in Para 12 of the petition (e) that provides that in the event any activity is already been undertaken within the 1 km or standard buffer zone as the case may be, of any wildlife sanctuary or national park which does not come within the ambit of prohibited activities as per the 09.02.2011 guidelines, such activities may continue with permission of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest. The record shows that the PP has taken permission from the competent authorities including the State Govt. and after taking a permission the consent to established under Section 25 & 26 The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and under Section(4) A The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 has been issued by the State Pollution Control Board, Rajasthan. The Director, Local Cell Government, Jaipur, Rajasthan vide letter dated 04.01.2022 has already issued. The requisite permission with certain conditions. Department of Forest has already communicated and submitted the report that the land does not fall within the ambit of forest land. Learned counsel for the applicant has further raised the issue of compliance of guidelines of eco sensitive zone.
40. In response thereof learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the draft proposal for eco sensitive zone which was sent to MoEF&CC was lapsed and the MoEF&CC has called the draft proposal from the State of Rajasthan and the Forest Department has notified the draft for public hearing. After public hearing it is argued that the draft has been finalised relevant portion are quoted hereunder :-
"The key objectives of this study are to create a Zonal Master Plan of Eco-Sensitive Zone of Nahargarh, advise development regulations, and suggest proposals to mitigate negative environmental effects. The Zonal Master Plan of Eco-Sensitive 46 Zone of Nahargarh addresses all the key development issues, including land use, infrastructure, and transportation, with a primary focus on ecology, environment, and wildlife. The Zonal Master Plan includes a number of studies to analyse the current conditions of various significant tourist destinations, their current situation and infrastructure availability, tourism statistics, environmental issues, and identification of potential tourism sites, as well as the creation of facilities for overall improvement of tourism footfall and tourism sites. The records will make it easier to determine the historical significance and heritage value of potential tourist destinations. The primary aim of declaring any area as an eco-sensitive zone is to establish a buffer zone or transition zone in order to safeguard the wildlife sanctuary's ecosystem and to enhance both the biotic environment of the sanctuary and the buffer zone surrounding it. As a result, it's important to identify the numerous factors that contribute to environmental deterioration and provide solutions.
41. Villages under ESZ, Nahargarh Nahargarh Eco-Sensitive Zone comprises various villages within its boundary. As per Gazette Notification of MoECC dated 8th March 2019, there are total 26 villages falling in the limit of Nahargarh ESZ. Out of total 26 villages 13 villages fall under Nahargarh Wildlife Sanctuary whereas remaining 13 villages are in rest of the ESZ area. As per the above table village Kukas is mentioned in Sanctuary boundary as well as in Eco-Sensitive Zone, the reason being Kukas village is at the boundary of Wildlife Sanctuary and shares its area in both the zones. When the ESZ boundary as per the geo-coordinates was superimposed on GIS map then it was found that nine villages are falling completely or partially with in ESZ area.
47
42. Detailed secondary data collection and field surveys have been conducted on the following aspects to identify present issues, condition assessment, and growth trends in the area-
i. Existing land use survey for the ESZ area.
ii. Natural water bodies and water pollution iii. Tourism and Eco-tourism iv. Natural heritage sites v. Man-made heritage sites (Buildings, structures, and precincts of historical, architectural, aesthetic, and cultural significance vi. Noise pollution vii. Air pollution viii. Surveys for physical infrastructure including water, power, sewerage system, other sanitation issues, etc. ix. Study of a disposal system for solid waste management (SWM) including medical wastes, etc. x. Transportation issues and suggesting plans for strengthening of Transportation network, Parking, Public transport, etc. xi. Industries in the immediate vicinity that may cause pollution, mining activities (if any).
xii. Collection of secondary information from the Census of India, G.T. Sheets, and other line departments.
43. Physical development proposals It enshrines the below-given aspects of developments:
i. A plan has been made for indicating planned uses as per the Master Development Plan of JDA and uses permitted hereafter to comply with the ESZ guidelines. (Nahargarh ESZ notification dated 8th March 2019 by MoEFCC).
ii. Plans for balanced development with specific emphasis on tourism, heritage, and ecology have been prepared. The promotion of biodiversity was the focal point and to achieve this, proposals have been prepared and given for improvement of conditions of water bodies, forest areas, retention of water, and soil conservation, in the Nahargarh ESZ.
44. EXISTING LANDUSE OF NAHARGARH ESZ BACKGROUND This chapter deals with the current landuse status of the Nahargarh ESZ and 48 development control aspects. Landuse and development control regulations provide the necessary guidelines for physical development proposals. The total area notified under Nahargarh ESZ has been divided into three parts:
1) Wildlife Sanctuary Area (Protected Area), known as Wildlife Sanctuary Zone 2) The area lying outside Wildlife Sanctuary Zone but within one kilometer buffer zone around the Wildlife Sanctuary, or ESZ boundary whichever is nearer, is known as Zone 1 B 3) Area beyond Wildlife Sanctuary Zone and one kilometer buffer zone (Zone 1B), but within ESZ boundary known as Zone 1 C. Table: 7.1 Existing Landuse in Nahargarh ESZ, 2022 (Area in ha.) Sl. No. Landuse Area ESZ Area Developed WLS Area Zone wise Zone 1B Zone IC Total % Existing 1 Residential 128.10 86.44 214.54 33.09 134.6 Special Area 0.76 00.00 0.76 0.12 73.89
2. Commercial 36.17 25.72 61.89 9.54 23.21
3. Mixed 5.72 1.97 7.69 1.19 17.25
4. Industrial 15.11 24.43 39.54 6.10 44 S. Government 1.39 32.25 33.64 5.19 2.32
6. Public and Semi 25.51 9.26 34.77 5.36 78.36 Public (PSP)
7. Recreational 9.18 0.41 9.59 1.48 31.59
8. Circulation 85.40 161.36 246.76 38.06 70.36 Total Developed 306.57 341.85 648.42 100.00 401.69 Area
9. Vacant Land 204.90 222.69 427.59 95.01
10. Agriculture 535.10 400.80 935.9 - 417
11. Water Body 86.36 24.23 110.59 - 91.53
12. Government 1.19 0.76 1.95 - 4.37 Reserved Land t3. Forest Land + Hills+ 870.50 4736.12 5606.62 - 5469 G1+ G2 +Eco1ogical Area Total 2004.62 5726.45 7731.07 - 6478.6
45. Special Area It is a prerequisite to note that, the old Amer Abadi area has been named as a Special Area in MDP 2025 and has a total area of 74.17 ha, which is a part of the ESZ area. The remaining Special Area is part of the walled city area, which comprises 0.48 ha. Out of the old Amer Special area, 54.11 ha. (72.95%) is a developed area. In this developed area, most 49 prominent use is public & semi-public use, which is 21.66 ha. (48.53 %), followed by residential use 19.35 ha. (35.76 %).
46. Comparative Analysis of Existing and Proposed Landuse in Nahargarh ESZ The ESZ boundary is superimposed on the proposed landuse map of ZDP (2025). The map illustrates the proposed landuse as per ZDP-2025, which indicates that a significant portion of the area envisaged in the master plan has not yet been developed. According to this analysis, neither the recreational use nor the public and semi-public use anticipated in MDP- 2025 has implemented, leaving a deficit of 110.08 ha and 460.01 ha, respectively. More commercial landuse has been suggested in ZDP-2025 than has been proposed for mixed-use and commercial landuse. There are 6.14 ha and 39.46 ha of extra land, respectively. According to ZDP-2025 recommendations, only 648.42 ha of the total 1794.41 ha developable area has been developed thus far; consequently, 1145.99 ha area remains to be developed according to the Existing Landuse Survey-2022.
47. Buffers Zones along Wetlands - There is a total area of 202.12 ha under waterbodies in the Nahargarh ESZ, which is 1.42 percent of the total geographical area of ESZ. It is important to conserve the waterbody and surrounding wetland, hence a buffer of it is proposed around the major waterbodies of the ESZ to enhance the wetland ecosystem around these waterbodies. A major issue arises from the existing development which lies within the buffer zone of water bodies. It is hence clarified that existing development need not be demolished and can be retained as such but no new construction in this buffer zone shall be allowed to take place. As per MOEF&CC there is no wetland in Nahargarh ESZ Area. However important water bodies of Nahargarh ESZ are important as they support in biodiversity & helping ground water recharge.
i. Prohibited Activities As per the Nahargarh ESZ Notification the prohibited activities are given in Annexure.
50 ii. Regulated Activities As per the Nahargarh ESZ Notification the regulated activities are given in Annexure.
iii. Promoted Activities As per the Nahargarh ESZ Notification the promoted activities are given in Annexure.
48. In case of Nahargarh ESZ area all the activities shall be in consonance with Annexures 10A, 10B and 10C.
49. Monitoring Committee for Monitoring the Eco-Sensitive Zone For effective monitoring of the provisions of this notification under Sub-Section (3) of Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the Central Government hereby constitutes a Monitoring Committee, comprising of the following, namely:
Table: Monitoring Committee S. Constituent of the Monitoring Designation No. Committee 1 District Collector, Jaipur Chairman, ex officio 2 Sub Divisional Officer, Amer Member;
3 A representative of a non-governmental Member;
organisation or working in the field of wildlife conservation to be nominated by the Government of Rajasthan for three years 4 One expert in Ecology and Environment from a Member;
reputed institution or the university of the State is to be nominated by the Government of Rajasthan for three years.
5 Honorary wildlife warden, Jaipur Member;
6 Regional Officer, Rajasthan Slate Pollution Control Member;
Board 7 Mayor, Jaipur Municipal Corporation Member; 8 Pradhan, Panchayat Samiti, Amer Member:
9 Member of the Slate Biodiversity Board Member; 10 Deputy Conservator of Forest/Wildlife, Jaipur Member-5ecretary.
50. Encroachment As said earlier, being close to the Jaipur city, encroachment is a major problem in and around Nahargarh Wild Life Sanctuary. Nahargarh, Kishanbagh, Kunda, Kukas, Kundlav, Devikhol and Kalamahadev are the encroachment prone areas. The encroachment in the areas is primarily for houses. The following strategies are mentioned to tackle the encroachments:
51
i. Patrolling of the boundaries of the sanctuary should be done regularly to check if there is any breach of the boundary line.
ii. Officials such as DCF, ACF, and RFOs should personally inspect boundary pillars from time to time as per the norms and the report thus obtained should be monitored in the review meeting.
iii. All the broken or removed pillars are to be replaced immediately.
iv. The non-mutated land should be taken up on priority basis for mutation. This matter should be taken up at higher level.
v. Land records, and block details should be maintained at range and naka level.
vi. Encroachment cases must be given priority.
vii. Construction of pucca boundary wall in encroachment infested areas should be taken on priority so that further encroachments can be controlled.
viii. Pressure should be created on state government to shift the kachi- basties (slums) habited on forestland.
ix. Such departments i.e. RSVNL, PHED and DSO Should be instructed through a government policy to not issuing power and water connections and ration cards to encroachers.
x. JDA and Nagar Nigam should be instructed not to conduct any survey for regularization of encroachments on forestland.
xi. Beat maps of the area should be prepared showing clear boundaries, and other important features. The beat guard should have these beat maps all the time so that he can inspect the boundaries falling in his area of control.
xii. Name of block, compartment number and number of pillar should be inscribed on the pillar and record maintained in the office.
xiii. The entire forest land records should be entered in the computer.52
Manmade Heritage
51. Jaipur, popularly known as the "Pink City of India", is the capital city of Rajasthan. This heritage city is part of the "Golden Triangle" formed between AgraDelhi- Jaipur, and it is also observed that every international tourist visiting India, visits Jaipur also. Besides fort and fortress, this city offers several unexplored destinations for nature-based tourism. Important Tourist Sites and Infrastructure Availability Table: List of Protected Monuments under Central Archaeology Department in WLS Sr. No. Name of the Sites
1. Sun Tempel, Amer
2. Jama Masjid / Akbari Masjid, Amer
3. Laxmi Narayan Temple
4. Shri Jagat Shiromani Temple, Amer Table: List of Protected Monuments under State Archaeology Department in WLS Sr. No. Name
1. Sudarshana/ Nahargarh
2. Cenotaphs of Gaitore
3. Charan Mandir
4. Wall Paintings of Chhatari near Prachin Govind Devaji ka
5. Temple Amber Ghati
6. Sun Temple, Amber
7. Amber Palace on Hill, Amber
8. Prachin Mahal below hill, Amber
9. Panna Miyan Ka Kund, Amber
10. Dalaram Garden, Amber
11. Sanghi Temple, Amber
12. Narsingha Temple, Amber
13. The rampart of old Amber town, Amber
14. Sanghi Temple, Amber
15. Narsingha Temple, Amber
16. The rampart of old Amber town, Amber 53
52. Other Important Historical Sites under :-
1. Amer Fort
2. Nahargarh Fort
3. Jaigarh Fort, Amer
4. Sagar Lake, Amer
5. Panna-Meena Kund, Amer
6. Gator ki chatriyan, Brahmpuri
7. Odhi Bhavan, Shishyawas
8. Kuntalgarh Fort, Shishyawas Other Important Religious sites
1. Amba Mata Temple, Kuntal
2. Bhuteshwar Mahadev Temple, Shishyawas
3. Chode Ke Hanuman Ji Temple, Amer
4. Ganesh Temple, Near Gator
5. Jatti Ke BalaJi Temple, Amer
6. Jama Masjid, Amer
7. Kadmeshwar MAHADEV Temple, Amer List of activities prohibited within Eco-Sensitive Zone Sr. Activity Description No. 1 2 3 A. Prohibited Activities 1 Commercial mining, stone All new and existing min in g (minor quarrying and crushing units and major minerals), stone quarrying and crushing units are prohibited within mediate effect except for meeting the domestic needs of bona fi de residents including digging of earth for construction or repair of h o uses and for manufacture of country tiles 54 or bricks for ha using and for other activities.
The mining operations shall be carried out in accordance with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated the 4'" August, 2 006, and dated 28'^ April 2023 in the matter of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. UOI in W.P.(C) No. 202 o 1995 and dated the 21st April, 2014 in the matter of Goa Foundation Vs. UOI in W.P.(C) No. 435 of 2012.
2 Setting of industries ca using New industries and expansion of pollution (Water, Air, Soil, Noise, existing polluting industries in the Eco etc.). -Sensitive Zone shall not be permitted:
Provided that non-pol1uting
industries shall be allowed within Eco-
Sensitive Zone as per classification of
Industries in the guidelines issued by
the Central Pollution Control Board in
February 2016, unless otherwise
specified in this notification and in
addition the non- polluting cottage
industries shall be promoted.
3 Establishment of major hydro- Prohibited (except as otherwise
electric project. provided) as per the
4 Use or production or processing of Prohibited (except as otherwise
any hazardous substances. provided) as per the applicable laws
5 Discharge of untreated effluents in Prohibited (except as otherwise
natural water bodies or land area. provided) as per the applicable laws.
6 Setting up of new saw mills. New or expansion of existing saw mills
shall not be permitted within the Eco-
Sensitive Zone.
7 Setting u p of brick kilns. Prohibited (except as otherwise
provided) as per the applicable laws.
8 Commercial use of firewood Prohibited (except as otherwise
provided) as per the applicable laws.
9 New wood-based industry Prohibited (except as otherwise
provided) as per the applicable laws.
10 Fishing Prohibited (except as otherwise
55
provided) as per the applicable laws.
11 Use of plastic carry bags. Prohibited (except as otherwise
provided) as per the applicable laws.
List of Activities to be Regulated within Eco-Sensitive Zone B. Regulated Activities 12 Commercial establishment of No new commercial hotels and resorts hotels and resorts. shall be permitted within one kilometer of the boundary of the protected area or up to the extent of Eco -Sensitive Zone, whichever is nearer, except for small temporary structures for eco- tourism activities:
Provided that, beyond one kilometer from the boundary is nearer, a II new tourist activities o r expansion of existing activities shall be in conformity with the Tourism Master Plan and guidelines of the protected area or up to the extent of Eco-
Sensitive Zone whichever as
applicable.
13 Construction activities (a) New commercial construction of
any kind shall not be permitted
within one kilometer from the
boundary of the protected area or up
to extent of the Eco -Sensitive 2one,
whichever is nearer:
Provided that, local people shall be
permitted to undertake construction
in their land in their use including
the activities mentioned in sub-
paragraph (1) of paragraph3 as per
building bye-laws to meet the
residential needs of the local
residents. Provided further that the
construction activity related to
small scale industries not causing
pollution sha11 be regulated and
kept at the minimum, with the prior
permission from the competent
56
authority as per applicable rules and
regulations, if any.
Beyond one kilonjeter it shall be
regulated as per the Zonal Master
Plan.
14 Felling of trees There shall be no felling of trees in
the forest or Government or reven ue
or private la nds without prior
permission of the Competent
Authority in the State Government.
The felling of trees shall be regulated
in accordance with the provisions of
the concerned Central or State Act
and the rules made there under.
15 Commercial extraction of surface Regulated as per the applicable laws
and ground water.
16 Erection of electrical and
communication towers and laying Regulated under applicable laws
of cables and other (underground cabling may be
infrastructures. promoted).
17
Widening and strengthening of Taking measures of mitigation as
existing roads and construction of per the applicable laws, rules and
new roads. regulation and available guidelines.
18 Movement of vehicular traffic at Regulated for commercial purpose
nigh t. under applicable laws.
19 Introduction of exotic species. Regulated as per the applicable
laws.
20 Protection of hill slopes Regulated as per the applicable
and riverbanks. laws.
21 Discharge of treated wastewater or The discharge of treated wastewater effluents in natural water bodies or effluents shall be avoided to enter or land area. into the water bodies and efforts shall be made for recycle and reuse of treated wastewater. Otherwise, the discharge of treated wastewater or effluent shall be regulated as per the applicable laws.
22 Commercial sign boards and Regulated as per the applicable
hoardings. laws.
23 Non-polluting industries as per
classification of industries issued by
57
Small scale non-polluting the Central Pollution Control Board
industries. in February, 2016 and non-
hazardous, small-scale and service
industry, agriculture, floriculture,
horticulture or agro- based industry
producing products from indigenous
materials from the Eco- Sensitive Zone
shall be permitted by the competent
Authority.
24 Collection of Forest produce or Regulated as per the applicable
Non-Timber forest produce. laws.
25 Solid waste management. Regulated as per the applicable
laws.
26 Eco Tourism. Regulated as per the applicable laws
27 Bio- Medical Waste Management. Regulated as per the applicable
laws.
28 Air and vehicular pollution. Regulated as per the applicable laws.
29 Drastic Change of Regulated as per the applicable laws.
Agriculture systems.
30 Fencing of existing premises Regulated as per the applicable
of hotels and lodges. laws.
31 Infrastructure including civic Taking measures of mitigation as
amenities. per the applicable laws, rules, and
regulations available guidelines.
32 Establishment of large-scale Regulated (except otherwise provided)
commercial livestock and poultry as per the applicable laws except for farms by firms, corporate and meeting local needs. companies.
33 Undertaking other activities Regulated as per the applicable related to tourism like flying over laws.
the Eco-Sensitive Zone area by hot air balloon, helicopter, drones, Microlites, etc. 34 Ongoing agriculture and Permitted as per the applicable laws for use of locals.
horticulture practices by local
communities along with dairies,
dairy farming, aquaculture, and
fisheries.
List of activities to be Promoted within Eco-Sensitive Zone C. Promoted Activities 35 Rain water harvesting. Shall be actively promoted. 36 Organic farming. Shall be actively promoted. 58
37 Adoption of green technology for all Shall be actively promoted.
activities.
38Cottage industries including Shall be actively promoted. village artisans, etc. 39 Use of renewable energy and fuels. Bio-gas, solar light etc. shall be actively promoted.
40 Agro-Forestry. Shall be actively promoted. 41 Environmental awareness. Shall be actively promoted. 42 Skill Development Shall be actively promoted. 43 Restoration of degraded land/ Shall be actively promoted.
forests/ habitat.
44 Plantation of Horticulture and Shall be actively promoted.
Herbals.
45 Use of eco-friendly transport. Shall be actively promoted.
53. In view of the above discussion and submission of the learned counsel for the parties, the conclusions are as follows :-
i. The draft notification which was issued vide no. S.O. No. 1960(E) dated 18.06.2020 with regard to the Eco Sensitive Zone in the present matter is now lapsed in accordance with the Environmental (Protection Rules) 1986. The MoEF&CC vide letter dated 06.04.2023 has communicated the State of Rajasthan and Principal Chief Conservator of Forest with regard to the above facts and directed to submit a fresh revised proposal for republication of draft ESZ Notification.
ii. The draft notification is under preparation or under submission or to be finalized at the stage of MoEF&CC after submission of the draft by the State Govt.
iii. The notification dated 13.05.2016 issued by the State of Rajasthan with regard to boundaries of Tiger Habitant of Ranthambor, Tiger Reserve, Khumbalgarg Wildlife Sanctuary, the notes appended provides that this order shall not apply to the conversion/construction of the resort for which no objection 59 certificate has been issued by the Forest Department prior to 31.03.2015.
iv. The Forest Department has issued NOC in favour of the PP including the order of the State Govt. High Level CABINET Committee with transfer of the land, permission in favour of the project proponent and NOC by the Forest Department/ Tiger Reserve and by the other department of the State Govt. v. The draft notification of Eco-sensitive Zone, Nahargarh, 10.4 with regard to existing activity/use provides that for purpose of ZMP for the ESZ hotels, resort, commercial establishments etc. shall be considered as existing, if they have any following issued prior to 08.03.2019 ESZ notification of Nahargarh, which includes electricity connection approval by the Tourism Department, conversion of the order building plan order regarding change in land use CTE, CTO, Environmental Clearance, and the Project Proponent has submitted the copy of the report of the high level cabinet committee resolution with the order of the State Govt. issued by the Secretary of the Department.
vi. The directions issued in W.P.(C) 202/1995 in I.A. No. 1000/2003 dated 03.06.2022 as referred by the applicant has been modified vide order dated 26.04.2023 passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India, the same Writ Petition in I.A. No. 131377/2022. vii. The Principal Secretary, Revenue, the State Govt. of Rajasthan and District Magistrate, Pali, Rajasthan in its affidavit had submitted that area under question falls outside the ESZ and PWD, Water Department and Forest Department have already issued the NOC in favour of the PP on 01.02.2011. Requisite CTO & CTE have been issued in favour of the PP by the State Pollution Control Board and land in question is within the periphery of the Nagar Palika, Sadadi, Rajasthan being the land of the 60 Department of Town Planning. The matter has already been scrutinized by the screening committee of the department of local self Govt. and later on Forest Department and the Ministerial Empowered Committee.
viii. Accordingly we direct as follows :-
i. The respondents are directed to strictly follow the guidelines and the provisions contained in the ESZ notifications pertaining to the respective area with regard to prohibited activities, regulated activities and permissible activities.
ii. The State Govt. is directed to finalize the draft notification and send to the MoEF&CC for finalization and MoEF&CC is directed to take necessary steps to finalize the draft notification within a time frame.
iii. The State Level Tourism and eco Tourism strategy for Tiger Reserve shall be in tune with the guidelines and adequate provisions shall be made to ensure that the eco tourism does not get relegated to purely high in exclusive tourism living out local communities. The monitoring committee, the local advisory committee is to be constituted for the purpose to ensure site specific norms in building and infrastructure in areas in site and close to Tiger Reserve keeping in view the coordinate value and ecological esthetics and to regularly monitor all these environmental areas of coverage and ownership type of constructions local advisory committee/monitoring committee must work to finalise all the resource within a time frame. The directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 26.04.2023 passed in above noted case must be strictly complied and the rights of the 61 villagers residing in the protected areas and required to be settled in accordance with the provisions contained in Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and rights which has been accrued in light of the provisions of law and order of the revenue laws and decisions taken by the high level cabinet committee meeting should be taken care of and should be strictly observed with till the decision of final notification is taken by the MoEF&CC. The provisions contained in notification dated 13.05.2016 (F-
3(10)/forest/2014 issued by the department of forest, Govt. of Rajasthan should be strictly observed with the notes in the case of PP that this order shall not apply to the conversion/construction of the resorts for which No Objection Certificate has been issued by the department prior to 31.03.2015.
iv. In case of the project proponent NOCs have been issued prior to 31.03.2015 and permitted and regulated activities should continue in view of the existing structure and further modification will be in accordance with a decision taken by the monitoring committee.
v. Regulated categories and permitted categories shall be governed by the draft notification Section 10(b) of (c) and monitoring committee /local advisory committee shall periodically monitor.
vi. Since, the respondent nos. 8 & 9 have taken permission from the State Govt. and the high powered cabinet committee has decided the matter and requisite permission from the competent authorities have been taken in 2011 and later on before the specified date as per notification dated 13.05.2016 and in light of the note 62 appended, the restrain order passed by this Tribunal dated 19.05.2023 in para 12 is redundant and merged with this final order. Permitted, regulated activities will be examined by the monitoring committees as constituted under Sub-Clause(3) of Section 3 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and further development, construction, repair, restructure of non- prohibited will be subject to decision taken by the monitoring committee.
All the pending I.As stand disposed of accordingly.
54. A copy of the order be sent to Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, State of Rajasthan, Chief Wildlife Warden, Rajasthan and District Magistrate, Pali, Rajasthan for information and for compliance. Original Application No. 113/2023 stands disposed of accordingly.
Sheo Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM 18th October, 2023 O.A. No. 113/2023 (CZ) PN 63