Delhi High Court: A petition was filed seeking the removal of illegal and unauthorised encroachment in the reserved and notified forest land on the Aravalli hill range in village Asola, Delhi which forms part of the Southern Ridge. Jasmeet Singh, J., restrained the respondents from conducting the proposed event, i.e. Cyclothon and Walkathon as nothing has been shown that the guidelines made under Policy for Eco-Tourism in Forest and Wildlife Areas are enforced.
The amicus curiae in the present matter raised concerns over proposed events at the Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary by the Department of Forest on 9th and 10-12-2023, namely “Walk with Wildlife”, which is to include a Walkathon, a Cyclothon, a half marathon and “Jungle on Wheels” to be conducted over a stretch of 16-kms. However subsequently, it was informed that the event is restricted to a Walkathon and a Cyclothon. It was further submitted that the same cannot be permitted since it is not only violative of the orders of this court and the Supreme Court but also in violation of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
Counsel for Department of Forest and Wildlife refuted the submissions on the ground that the event will be taken up in the Eco-Sensitive Zone of Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary to promote awareness and appreciation of the Sanctuary amongst the residents of Delhi-NCR. It would be waste-neutral, and no noise would be generated. As per Section 28 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, permission can be granted to people under certain circumstances to enter or reside in a sanctuary.
Counsel for the Department of Forest and Wildlife placed on record the Eco-Tourism Plan for the Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary by the Department of Forests and Wildlife which stated that there will be no environmental obstacle in the conducting/organizing of such an event. It was also submitted that unlike the National Parks where tourism is permitted, there is a lack of demarcation of inviolate and sensitive areas in the Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary. The Management Plan of the Sanctuary does not have any division of buffer zone and core zone, thus, to permit this event is not only endangering the wildlife but also the people.
The Court noted that sanctuaries are made for the preservation and protection of wildlife in their natural habitat and animals along with humans must co-exist, but lately, man has been encroaching on the habitat of wildlife. Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary was made on a stretch of 32.71 sq. kms having many kinds of species/animals in the Sanctuary, ranging from reptiles, herbivores and carnivores, in addition to the flora and fauna, there are about 7-8 leopards, however, neither the animals are tagged nor is the area is isolated.
The Court further noted that all sanctuaries have a core zone and buffer zone. The core zone is the most important zone where human intervention is minimal and there is total prohibition of any movement of unauthorized persons. The Buffer Zone permits tourism and the movement of persons with prior approvals. As far as the Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary is concerned, there is no demarcation of core and buffer zone meaning thereby there is no separate, exclusive, core area where the movements of leopards and other animals such as pythons, hyenas are confined to. The Court worries that there has been a recent spotting of a leopard in Sainik Farm which adjoins Asola. Six days have passed and yet the forest officers have failed to locate the stray leopard. According to the press news, this leopard has strayed in from the Asola Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary and three people have been attacked.
The Court observed that ‘Copy of notings’ clearly shows that the permission for the proposed event was granted in a mechanical manner with no analysis of the threat perception to the people, the animals and the Sanctuary. The advertisement showed a walkathon and a Cyclothon to be conducted in the reserved and notified forest land, which cannot be permitted as it not only endangered the lives of citizens who will be willing to participate in the event but also the lives of the animals existing in the wildlife sanctuary, no arrangement for safety and security put forth.
The Court concluded that conducting of such an event has all the trappings of it turning out to be a misadventure as the location of the animals are unknown, their area of movement is not isolated, the certainty regarding number and species are guesswork and there appears to be no plan in place. A combined reading of sections 27 and 28 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act shows that there are stringent restrictions on entry in Sanctuaries and only in exceptional circumstances, as contained in section 28, the Chief Wildlife Warden may permit the entry for specific purposes. In the present case, no such exceptional reasons have been given for grant of permission/approval except that it is for “eco-tourism”.
[Devinder v Lt. Governor, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 7729, decided on 07-12-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Gautam Narayan, Mr. Aditya N. Prasad, Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Amici Curiae with Ms. Asmita Singh, Mr. H Goel, Mr. BI Singh, advocates for petitioner
Mr. Satyakam, ASC with Mr. Pradyut Kashyap, Ms. Vishnupriya Pandey, advocates for respondents
