Appellants: Pu. C. Thangmura Vs. Respondent: Pu. F. Vanlalthlana: Decided On: 26.05.2003, In the High Court of Gauhati

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI

WP(C) PIL No. 34 of 2001

Decided On: 26.05.2003

Appellants: Pu. C. Thangmura
Vs.
Respondent: Pu. F. Vanlalthlana

Hon’ble Judges:
P.P. Naolekar, C.J. and I.A. Ansari, J.

Counsels: 
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: H. Roy, N. Sinha, U. Goswami and D. Bhattacharjee, Advs.

For Respondents/Defendant: K.N. Choudhury, D.K. Das, M.B. Sarma and A. Baruah, Advs.

Subject: Environment

Catch Words: 
Act, Allegation, Animal, Appropriate, Assembly, Assured, Authority, Certified Copy, Commission, Commission of Offence, Conduct, Copy, Date, Date Of, Demand, Direction, Duty, Enquiry, Enquiry Officer, Government, Legislative Assembly, Letter, Mark, Month, Newspaper, Offence, Office, Officer, Order, Period, Permission, Petition, Prima Facie, Principal, Public, Receipt, Report, Secretary, Servant, State, State Government, Statement, Vehicle, Wild Life

Acts/Rules/Orders:
Wild Life (Protection) Act; Wild Life (Protection) Rules

JUDGMENT

P.P. Naolekar, C.J.

1. This PIL has been filed making allegations as contained in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, they are reproduced below –

“5. That the petitioner states that one Pu. Hranghleikapa of Samphai in the State of Mizoram donated a barking deer on 11.6.2000 which he found in the forest at Samphai to Pu K Vanlaluana, Minister of State, Government of Mizoram for handing over the same to the Government run Mini Zoo at Aizawl. Then the said Minister by his Government Gypsy vehicle No. MZ-01-2082 carried the deer to Aizawl. While transporting the said wild animal, the said Sri K. Vanlaluava did not obtained any permission from the Chief Wild Life Warden or any authorized Office of the State Government as contemplated under Section 48(A) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Later on, it was found that the servants of the said K. Vanlaluava prepared the meat of the animal for the purpose of the dinner hosted by K. Vanlalauva in honour of the Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State.

6. That the aforesaid facts were reported in the local newspapers in Mizoram and on the demand of animal lovers of the State, the Government of Mizoram, through the Chief Secretary directed Sri S. S. Patnaik, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests-cum-Secretary, Environment and Forests to conduct the enquiry into the matter either by himself or through the DFO (Wildlife), Aizawl. That the Divisional Forest Office (Wildlife), Aizawl made necessary enquiry into the matter and submitted his report before the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests on 4.7.2000. On the basis of the said report, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests-cum-Secretary, Environment and Forests by his letter under memo No. UOPB/1/98/CON/PCCF, dated 7.7.2000 intimated the Chief Secretary that the Barking Deer which was killed by the Minister of State falls under Schedule-3 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and he has committed an offence under Section 39(3)(A) and Section 48(A) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

A copy of the report dated 7.7.2000 along with the statement of Pu. K. Vanlalauva made before the Enquiry Officer are annexed herewith and marked as Annexures-1 and 2 respectively.

7. That your petitioner states that after the receipt of the enquiry report, the government assured the Public as well as the Legislative Assembly that appropriate action will be initiated soon against Pu. K. Vanlalauva for his commission of offence under Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. But surprisingly enough, in the very first week of August, 2001, the Chief Minister has directed the Chief Secretary not to pursue the matter and not initiate any action under the Wild Life (Protection) Act against his aforesaid colleague. Being encouraged by such direction, the said colleague of Chief Minister and his other colleagues have started visiting different forests and has responded to indiscriminate killings of rare wild animals such as Barking Deer, Wild Boar etc.”

2. The report of the enquiry conducted by Sri S.S. Patnaik, the Chief Conservator of Forests-cum-Secretary, Environment and Forests, Government of Mizoram, has also been filed along with the petition. From the allegations made in the petition and the enquiry report submitted thereof, it prima facie appears that some offence have been committed under the Wild Life (Protection) Act and the Rules framed thereunder and the Chief Secretary to the Government of Mizoram is duty bound to follow the law and cannot refuse to perform his duties under the guidance and directions of any authority.

3. Under the facts and circumstances, we direct the Chief Secretary to the Government of Mizoram to take appropriate steps in the matter in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of placement of a certified copy of this order before him.

4. The petition stands disposed of.