Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. The State Board for Wild Life (in short 'SBWL') recommended the denotification of the TWS alongwith compensatory/mitigation measures, in the following terms:-

"(1) Kacchua Wildlife Sanctuary, Varanasi was found to be very low on the basis of different parameters for suitability. Hence the proposal for de-notification may be forwarded to MoEF&CC for approval of the standing committee of the NBWL and as per prevailing legal provisions the permission be obtained from CEC / Hon'ble Supreme Court.
(2) Proposal for notification of 30 km (940 km to 970 km) stretch near Newada (Allahabad) as wild life sanctuary may be forwarded to MoEF&CC for approval of standing committee of NBWL and following action may also be taken simultaneously:
(a) The social Impact assessment of proposed Kacchua Wildlife Sanctuary will be conducted and mitigation measures would also be adopted.
(b) Opinion of Chief Naval Hydrographer would also be obtained.

The State Chief Wildlife Warden has recommended the proposal with following conditions:

"32. The Parliament later vide Act 16 of 2003 inserted Section 5-A w.e.f. 22-09-2003 authorising the Central Government to constitute the National Board for Wild Life (in short "NBWL"). By the same Amendment Act, Section 5-C was also introduced eliciting functions of the National Board. Section 5-B was also introduced by the aforesaid amendment authorising the National Board to constitute a Standing Committee for the purpose of exercising such powers and performing such duties as may be delegated to the Committee by the National Board. NBWL is, therefore, the top most scientific body established to frame policies and advise the Central and State Governments on the ways and means of promoting wild life conservation and to review the progress in the field of wild life conservation in the country and suggesting measures for improvement thereto. The Central and the State Governments cannot brush aside its opinion without any cogent or acceptable reasons. Legislation in its wisdom has conferred a duty on NBWL to provide conservation and development of wildlife and forests."

x x x x x

57. The views of NBWL constituted by the Central Government in exercise of its powers conferred under Section 5-A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, have to prevail over the views expressed by SBWL. The duties conferred on the National Board under Section 5-C of the Act and on the State Board under Section 8 of the Act are entirely different. NBWL has a duty to promote conservation and development of wildlife and frame policies and advise the Central Government and the State Governments on the ways and importance of promoting wildlife conservation. It has to carry out/make assessment of various projects and activities on wildlife or its habitat. NBWL has also to review from time to time the progress in the field of wildlife conservation in the country and suggest measures for improving thereto. Those functions have not been conferred on the State Board. The State Board has been conferred with a duty to advise the State Government the selection and management of areas to be declared as protected areas and advise the State Government in formation of their policies for protection and conservation of the wildlife and specify plans, etc. Statutorily, therefore, it is the duty of NBWL to promote conservation and development of wildlife with a view to ensuring ecological and environmental security in the country. We are, therefore, of the view that the various decisions taken by NBWL that Asiatic lion should have a second home to save it from extinction, due to catastrophes like epidemic, large forest fire, etc., which could result in extinction, is justified. This Court, sitting in the jurisdiction, is not justified in taking a contrary view from that of NBWL."