T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad .. Petitioner (s)

Versus

Union of India & Others .. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

Asiatic Wild Buffalo is reported to be the most impressive

and magnificent animal in the world. Often it is found in the

Western and Eastern Ghats of the country. Learned Amicus Curiae

has moved this Court seeking a direction to the Union of India

and the State of Chhattisgarh to prepare a rescue plan to save

Wild Buffalo, an endangered specie from extinction and to make

available necessary funds and resources required for the said

purpose and also for a direction to take immediate steps to

ensure that interbreeding between the wild and domestic buffalo

does not take place and the genetic purity of the wild species

is maintained. Direction was also sought for to prepare a scheme

in consultation with the villagers for relocation of villagers

from the Udanti Sanctuary to ensure the survival of the

endangered wild buffalo. Direction was also sought for that

all research and monitoring inputs including scientific

2

management of the wild buffalo and its habitat be made available

on long term basis by involving institutes such as the Wildlife

Institute of India, the Bombay Natural History Society etc.

2. The State of Chhattisgarh filed its reply affidavit on

30.01.2006 explaining the steps taken to conserve and preserve

the endangered species which was declared as a State Animal.

Along with the affidavit, a comprehensive operational Management

Plan for Udanti Wildlife Sanctuary was also enclosed stating

that the execution of the said Management Plan had suffered

setbacks due to acute financial shortage for its implementation.

Further, it was stated that the funds allotted under Central

Assistance from the Government of India, Ministry of Environment

and Forests was not in tune with the budget requirement for

development of the sanctuary and the conservation of the

endangered species. A chart showing shortfall in funds for the

development of the sanctuary has also been annexed with the

affidavit, so also a table showing the census figures of wild

buffalos. The reasons for the decline of the wild buffalos have

also been explained. In order to overcome those hurdles, it was

stated that an MoU was entered into with the Wildlife Trust of

India on 21.03.2005 which included special efforts for

maintaining the genetic purity of those species and for breeding

thereof. Steps taken to relocate the villagers residing within

the sanctuary area has also been highlighted.

3

3. This Court on 08.09.2006 passed an order directing the

Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to conduct an enquiry and

submit a report. Affidavit filed by the State was also placed

before the CEC and it had detailed discussions with the

officials of the State of Chhattisgarh and MoEF. State of

Chhattisgarh constituted a task force by its order dated

24.05.2007 for suggesting steps and formulating an action plan

for the conservation and increasing the number of wild buffalos

in the State. Proposal made by the Chief Wildlife Warden to

replace the domestic buffalos reared by the villagers with cows

and bullocks it was stated, was also given active consideration.

CEC after consultation with the MoEF as well as the officials of

the State Government submitted its report on 10.09.2008.

4. Steps taken by the State of Chhattisgarh to preserve and

conserve the wild buffalo which was declared as a State Animal

is far from satisfactory. When the matter came up for final

hearing, the counsel appearing for the MoEF made available a

copy of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme of 2009 (CSS) titled

"Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats". The Scheme was

formulated during the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The Scheme has

also incorporated additional components and activities for

implementing the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act,

1972 [for short the Act], National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-

2016), recommendations of the Tiger Task Force, 2005, and the

National Forest Commission, 2006 and the necessities felt from

4

time to time for the conservation of wildlife and biodiversity

in the country.

5. Before coming into force of the Act, the scheme which was in

force was "Assistance for the Development of National Parks and

Sanctuaries" which used to support only National Parks and

Wildlife Sanctuaries. However, following the amendment to the

Act, in 2003, two more categories of Protected Areas (PAs) i.e.

the Conservation Reserves and Community Reserves have been

recognized. Conservation Reserves, which are government land,

but do not require acquisition of rights, nor the curtailment of

activities as envisaged in National Parks and Wildlife

Sanctuaries are stated to be the most appropriate strategy for

connecting protected areas, by providing corridors. Community

Reserves are entirely based on efforts of the local people on

privately owned lands which require financial and technical

assistance for their future management. The Central Government

before the Act came into force did not have much control over

the States and the Union Territories for implementation of its

various schemes and the Parliament, in order to give effect to

Article 51A(g), enacted the Act for the protection of wild

animals, birds and plants and for matters connected therewith,

with a view to ensure the ecological and environmental security

of the country. Article 48A of the Constitution of India

imposes a duty on the State to protect and improve the

environment and to safeguard the forest and wildlife of the

country.

5

6. Article 51A(g) states that it is the duty of every citizen of

India to protect and improve the natural environment including

the wildlife and to have compassion for the living creatures.

By the 42nd Amendment Act 1976 of the Constitution "Forests" was

added as Entry 17A in the Concurrent List and the "protection of

wild animals and birds" was added as Entry 17B. Consequently,

both the Central and State Governments/UTs are mandated with the

responsibility of protection and conservation of wildlife and

its habitat. Chapter IV of the Act deals with the "protected

areas." Earlier headings `Sanctuaries', `National Parks' and

`Closed Areas', was substituted by the words "protected areas"

by Act 16 of 2003. Section 18 of the Act empowers the State

Government to declare its intention to constitute any area other

than an area comprised within any reserve forest or the

territorial waters as a sanctuary if it considers that such area

is of adequate ecological, faunal, floral, geomorphological,

natural or zoological significance, for the purpose of

protecting, propagating or developing wildlife or its

environment. Chapter IV also confers various other powers upon

the State Government like acquisition, initiation of acquisition

proceedings, declaration of areas as sanctuary, restriction on

entry to the sanctuaries etc. It is unnecessary to refer to

those provisions for the purpose of the instant case.

7. Section 36A of the Act empowers the State Government, after

consultations with the local communities, declare any area owned

6

by the Government, particularly the areas adjacent to National

Parks and sanctuaries and those areas which link one protected

area with another, as a conservation reserve for protecting

landscapes, seascapes, flora and fauna and their habitat. The

Act also empowers the State Government, where the community or

an individual has volunteered to conserve wildlife and its

habitat, declare any private or community land not comprised

within a National Park, Sanctuary or a Conservation Reserve, as

a Community Reserve, for protecting fauna, flora and traditional

or cultural conservation values and practice. The management

of Community Reserves shall primarily be done by the

communities/individuals themselves. The Centrally Sponsored

Scheme (CSS), therefore, intended to bring these two categories

of PAs also under the ambit of the Scheme along with the

existing National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.

8. The State of Forest Report 2005 states that the forest and

tree cover in the country is around 23.39%, of which forests

constitute around 20.64%. However, the PA network covers only

4.8% of the geographical area of the country with most of the

PAs forming part of the forest area. At present, India has a

network of 99 National Parks, 515 Wildlife Sanctuaries, 43

Conservation Reserves and 4 Community Reserves in different bio-

geographic zones. Protected Areas, i.e. Conservation Reserves

and Community Reserves have an important role to play in

maintaining geographical integrity of the Nation. Fact is that

many important habitats still exist outside those areas which

7

require special attention from the point of view of

conservation. Habitat of Sandalwood, red sanders, white cedar,

rhododendrons, Southern Tropical Montane forests, grasslands,

alpine meadows of Himalayan region, corridors connecting PAs and

crucial wildlife habitats, deserts, tropical swamps, rivers,

estuaries, bamboo and reed breaks, mangroves, coral reefs,

deserts etc. are examples of such habitats existing outside

conventional PAs. The tenurial status of such habitats ranges

from government-controlled Reserved Forests to Protected

Forests, revenue forests, interspersed vegetation in plantation

sector, revenue lands, village forests, private forests,

religious forests, territorial waters, Community Conserved Areas

etc. Such habitats also act as corridors for wildlife between

PAs thus ensuring connectivity in the landscape.

Human-wildlife conflict

9. Human-wildlife conflict is fast becoming a critical threat to

the survival of many endangered species, like wild buffalo,

elephants, tiger, lion etc. such conflicts affect not only its

population but also has broadened environmental impacts on

ecosystem equilibrium and biodiversity conservation. Laws are

man-made, hence there is likelihood of anthropocentric bias

towards man, and rights of wild animals often tend to be of

secondary importance but in the universe man and animal are

equally placed, but human rights approach to environmental

protection in case of conflict, is often based on

anthropocentricity.

8

10. Man-animal conflict often results not because animals

encroach human territories but vice-versa. Often, man thinks

otherwise, because man's thinking is rooted in anthropocentrism.

Remember, we are talking about the conflict between man and

endangered species, endangered not because of natural causes

alone but because man failed to preserve and protect them, the

attitude was destructive, for pleasure and gain. Often, it is

said such conflicts is due human population growth, land use

transformation, species habitat loss, degradation and

fragmentation, increase in eco-tourism, access to natural

reserves, increase in livestock population, etc. Proper

management practices have to be accepted, like conservation

education for local population, resettlement of villages,

curbing grazing by livestock and domestic animals in forest,

etc., including prey-preservation for the wild animals.

Provision for availability of natural water, less or no

disturbance from the tourists has to be assured. State also has

to take steps to remove encroachments and, if necessary, can

also cancel the patta already granted and initiate acquisition

proceedings to preserve and protect wildlife and its corridors.

Areas outside PAs is reported to have the maximum number of man-

animal conflict, they fall prey to poachers easily, and often

invite ire of the cultivators when they cause damage to their

crops. These issues have to be scientifically managed so as to

preserve and protect the endangered species, like wild buffalo

9

and other species included in Schedule 1 Part 1 of the Wildlife

Protection Act, as well as other species which face extinction.

11. Management plan for Udanti Wildlife Sanctuary (2002-

2003, 2011-2012) published by the Forest Department of

Government of Chattisgarh, paragraph 3.6.2 of the Report reveals

much more than what meets the eyes which reads as follows:-

"Prior to declaration as sanctuary this area was part of East Raipur Division in which rules to regulate illegal poaching and hunting existed.

Before declaration of Govt. forest it was under

control of Bindrawagrah Zameendar.

In those days shooting was allowed after receiving a fee of Rs.25/- at that time. Shooting of wild buffalo was prohibited after Govt. Notification no.1905-1517-4 dt. 27.08.1935 but in this zameendari one shooting licence holder was entitled to shoot one Bison, one Barasingha, Tow spotted deer and one Sambhar. Game rules of C.P. and Bear Game Act, 1935 and CP & Bear Bird game 1942 were existing in this are during past.

After end of Zameendari system when these forest became Govt. forest rules were enforced to regulate hunting vide notification no.788-2319 DT.19.8.53.

In these shooting rules of 1953 shooting of wild Buffalo was allowed after formal permission of Govt. But shooting of bison was prohibited. In shooting rules of 1955 different fee was decided for hunting. Shooting of Bison, wild buffalo, Barasingha, Tiger, Sambhar, Leopard, Sloth Bear and Cheetal were allowed.

These hunting rules were not very effective for regulation of shooting and hunting and therefore shooting was stopped by Govt. of M.P. completely vide notification no. 6036-10(2)-71 dt. Govt. of India in this regard started 11.11.1971. Effective steps after enforcement of wildlife protection act 1972."

12. Paragraph 3.6.3.2 deals with encroachment and other illegal

activity, which reads as follows :-

10

Encroachment and other Illegal activity

In UWLS encroachment for land hunger is not common practice. Sometime due to lack of clearcut demarcation live or boundaries, cases of encroachment have been observed. Therefore, village boundary should be development of villages and for the betterment of villagers in the revenue villages inside and around the sanctuary. These department are revenue, ICDS, Veterinary Health Services, Medical Department, State Electricity Board etc., semi Govt. village institutions like village and Janpad Panchayat are also working for development activities.

More development activity causes more interference in forest and the privacy of wild life. These ultimately cause conflict with wildlife.

Conflict with wildlife to the abnormal behaviour of wild animals like aggressiveness of monkey, cattle lifting by carnivore, injury by bears during Mahua season etc.

Development of people is always welcome but not in the cost of negative ecological in the ecosystem.

13. Report clearly states that development activities causes more

interference in forest and also the privacy of wildlife and these

ultimately cause conflict with wildlife. Man-animal conflict

often takes place when wild animals cause damage to agricultural

crop and property, killing of livestock and human beings. Human

population growth, land use transformation, species loss of

habitat, eco-tourism, too much access to reserves, increase in

livestock population bordering the forest, depletion of natural

prey base etc., often stated to be reasons for such conflict.

Central Govt. the State Governments, and the Union Territories

should evolve better preservation strategies, in consultation

11

with Wildlife Boards so that such conflicts can be avoided to a

large extent. Participation of people who are staying in the

Community Reserves is also of extreme importance. The necessity

of implementing proper management measures for preserving the

wild buffalo has also been elaborately stated in the Report.

14. Environmental justice could be achieved only if we drift away

from the principle of anthropocentric to ecocentric. Many of our

principles like sustainable development, polluter-pays principle,

inter-generational equity have their roots in anthropocentric

principles. Anthropocentrism is always human interest focussed

and non-human has only instrumental value to humans. In other

words, humans take precedence and human responsibilities to non-

human based benefits to humans. Ecocentrism is nature centred

where humans are part of nature and non-human has intrinsic

value. In other words, human interest do not take automatic

precedence and humans have obligations to non-humans

independently of human interest. Ecocentrism is therefore life-

centred, nature-centred where nature include both human and non-

humans. National Wildlife Action Plan 2002-2012 and centrally

sponsored scheme (Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats) is

centred on the principle of ecocentrism.

15. The National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016) is intended to

provide adequate protection to wildlife in multiple use areas

such as Government forests outside PAs, various Community

Conserved Areas like sacred groves, community and panchayat

12

forests, identified private forests such as interspersed forests

in tea, coffee and cardamom gardens and other protection

landscapes, farm lands, wastelands, wetlands, coastal habitats,

heronries, wintering wetlands of birds, catchment forests, turtle

nesting sites, pastures for livestock and wild herbivore, deserve

ecosystems etc.

Recovery Programmes

16. The Centrally Sponsored Scheme also deals with Recovery

programmes for saving critically endangered species and habitats.

It was noticed that, due to variety of reasons, several species

and their habitats have become critically endangered.

Consequently, the scheme intends to extend support to such

recovery programmes for saving critically endangered species and

their habitat based on the requirement felt from time to time.

The objective of this recovery plan of saving critically

endangered species/ecosystems cannot be covered under the

components of Conservation of PAs and protection of wildlife

outside PAs as disjunct population across a wider

landscape/seascape. Several programmes are proposed under the

recovery plan, of which one is to save the critically endangered

species of Asian Wild Buffalo and grasslands and riverine forests

of central and north India. Several other components were also

included in the recovery plan such as Dolphin and River Systems,

Nilgiri Tahr, Asiatic Lion etc. The scheme envisages that the

Director, Wildlife Preservation, Government of India, in

13

consultation with the Wildlife Institute of India or the relevant

scientific institute/organization and with the approval of the

Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife can

initiate other recovery programmes or wind up the ongoing

programme. The Director, Wildlife Preservation, is also

authorised to undertake assessment of the effectiveness of any

`recovery programme' already undertaken or being undertaken. The

Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats scheme specifically

highlighted the necessity to preserve and conserve the habitat of

wild buffalo. The scheme states as follows:

"Wild buffalo is one of the worst affected mammalian species in the recent times. Domestication of the species and continuous interbreeding with domestic buffalo has led to inbreeding, genetic disorders, competition and mortality due to disease. Apart from this, habitat fragmentation, degradation, and poaching are the main threats to the conservation of this globally threatened species. Urgent and concerted efforts are needed to recover this species from the brink of extinction."

17. Conservation and Management of Wildlife, as per the Act, is

primarily vested in the States / UTs who are in physical

possession of the area. It was noticed that many States/UTs

have set up various regular wildlife wings within the States/UT

Forest Departments and implemented a scheme as to be done in

accordance with a work programme covering the 11th Plan period.

The Centrally Sponsored Scheme, therefore, envisages that the

State/UTs are required to submit Annual Plan of Operations

(APOs) to the Central Government detailing the proposed course

of action, which consists of management planning and capacity

14

building, anti-poaching and infrastructure development,

restoration of habitats, eco-development and community oriented

activities etc. so as to qualify for the financial assistance

under the scheme. The concerned State/UTs have to follow

certain conditions which have been enumerated in the scheme.

18. The State of Chhattisgarh, in the instant case, has pointed

out that they could not effectively give effect to some of the

programmes for preservation and conservation of wild buffalo due

to lack of funds. The scheme envisages 100% assistance. It is

relevant to extract the Pattern of Funding and the same reads as

follows:

Pattern of Funding

7 Under the Scheme, 100% assistance is provided for non-recurring items of expenditure for National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Conservation Reserves and Community Reserves.

7 50% cost of recurring expenditure is provided for National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Conservation Reserves and Community Reserves where the State Government provides for the balance 50% as the matching share.

7 National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Conservation Reserves and community Reserves in mountain regions, coastal zones, deserts, or those areas which support highly endangered species i.e. Snow Leopard, Red Panda, Rhino, Sangai Deer, Phayre's leaf monkey, Musk Deer, Hangul, Great Indian Bustard, Great Indian Hornbill, Siberian Crane, Chinkara, Chowsingha, Black Buck, Marine Turtles, Nilgiri Tahr, Lion Tailed Macaque, Bustards, Floricans, Pelicans, Gyps Vultures, Wild Ass, Grizzled Giant Squirrel, Clouded Leopard, Wild Buffalo, Hoolock Gibbon and Lion are eligible for 100%

15

central assistance for both recurring and non-

recurring items of expenditure.

7 In the case National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Conservation Reservation and Community Reserves falling in the high mountainous, snow clad regions (where working season is limited to a few months) in the States of Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Sikkim, the central assistance shall be given in one instalment. For other States, the approved allocation shall be released in two instalments (80 per cent as 1st instalment and balance as 2nd instalment.)

7 Similarly, subject to site-specific adjustments, as a guiding principle, a 40:40:20: proportion of financial sharing shall be ensured between Centre, State as owners of the privately held land, when such areas are involved in the case of Community Reserves.

19. State of Chattisgarh has maintained the stand that they do

not have sufficient funds to undertake various programmes for

protection of wild buffalo within the national parks,

sanctuaries and also at conservation reserves and community

reserves. This stand cannot be countenanced now, especially

after the introduction of the Scheme.

20. Wild buffalo has been included as Item No. 41, Part I of

Schedule I of the Act. Once it is included in Schedule I, the

State Board for Wildlife has to advise the State Government in

the selection and management of the areas to be declared as

protected areas, in the formulation of policy for protection and

conservation of the wildlife etc., as per Section 8 of the Act.

Section 9 of the Act states that no person shall hunt any wild

animal specified in Schedule I to IV, except as provided under

Sections 11 and 12.

16

21. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has

calculated the percentage of endangered species as 40% of all

organisms. IUCN Red List refers to specific categories of

endangered species and includes critically endangered species.

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species uses the term endangered

species as a specific category of imperilment, rather than as a

general term. Under the IUCN Categories and Criteria,

endangered species is between critically endangered and

vulnerable. Wild water buffalo is included in the category of

endangered species. Apart from the human-animal conflict, the

most important threat to wild buffalo is inbreeding with feral

and domestic buffalo, habitat loss/degradation and hunting.

Diseases and parasites (transmitted by domestic livestock) and

competition for food and water between wild buffalo and domestic

stock are also serious threats. Habitat loss is also a major

concern for species endangerment. When wild buffalos' eco-

system is not maintained, they lose their home and either forced

to adopt new surroundings or human habitat. Eminent ecologists

have proposed biological corridors, biosphere reserves,

ecosystem management and eco-regional planning as approaches to

integrate biodiversity conservation and socio-economic

development at increasingly larger spatial scales.

22. We have seen the subjects `forest' and `protection of animals

and birds' are in the concurrent list of the Constitution and it

is the fundamental duty of every citizen of India under Article

17

51A(g) of the Constitution to protect and improve the natural

environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife. It

is to achieve the above objective and also to give effect to the

purpose of the object of the Act that the Central Government has

sponsored "the Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats". As

per the Scheme and the Act, the State Government is empowered to

notify conservation reserves and community reserves for

protecting the landscape, seascapes, flora and fauna and their

habitat. The Act also empowers the State Government to declare

any private and community land not comprised within the national

parks, sanctuaries or conservation reserves or community

reserves for protecting fauna, flora and traditional or cultural

conservation values and practice.

23. We are, therefore, inclined to dispose of this application

with the direction to the State of Chhattisgarh to give effect

fully the Centrally Sponsored Scheme - "the Integrated

Development of Wildlife Habitats", so as to save wild buffalo

from extinction. The State also would take immediate steps to

ensure that interbreeding between wild and domestic buffalos

does not take place and genetic purity of the wild species is

maintained. The State is also directed to take immediate steps

to undertake intensive research and monitor the wild buffalo

population in Udanti Wildlife Sanctuary and other areas, where

the wild buffalo may still be found, including preparing them

their genetic profile for future reference. The State is also

directed to take appropriate steps to initiate wildlife training

18

programmes for the officials of the State Forest Department,

especially for managing the above sanctuary and other areas

where the wild buffalos are found. The State is also directed

to submit Annual Plan of Operations to the Central Government

detailing the proposed course of action, if not already done, as

per the "Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats" scheme,

within a period of three months from today. All effective steps

should be taken by the State to protect the Asian wild buffalo

(Bubalus bubalis), which is declared as a State animal by the

State of Chattisgarh.

24. The applications are disposed of as above.

......................................J. (K.S. Radhakrishnan)

.......................................J. (Chandramauli Kr. Prasad) New Delhi, February 13, 2012

19

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I. A. Nos. 1287, 1570-1571, 1624-1625,

1978, 2395, 2795-2796

IN

WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 202 OF 1995

With

I.A. Nos. 2470-2471, 2472-2473, 2474-2475, 2476-2477, 2966-2967, in I.A.

No.1287 in W.P.(C) 202 OF 1995

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad .. Petitioner(s)

Versus

Union of India & Others .. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

We are in this case concerned with the question whether sandalwood

(Santalum album Linn) stated to be an endangered species, be declared as a

"specified plant" within the meaning of Section 2(27), and be included in the

Schedule VI of The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (for short the Act). On

going through the various international conventions, we thought it appropriate to

examine the repeated requests made by the State of Andhra Pradesh to the

Central Govt. to notify Red Sanders (Pterocarpus santalinus) as a `specified

plant' and be included in the Schedule VI of the Act.

20

2. A non-governmental organisation moved the Central Empowered

Committee (CEC) to initiate steps for closure of all unlicensed sandalwood oil

industries, particularly in the State of Kerala. CEC after conducting a detailed

enquiry and hearing the state officials, representatives of the sandalwood

industries and various other interested persons, submitted its report dated 24 th

February 2005 before this Court praying that all unlicensed sandalwood oil

industries be also brought within the purview of this Court's order dated

30.12.2002 by which this Court had ordered the closure of all unlicensed saw

mills, veneer and plywood industries in the country. Various other directions

were also sought for. Report of the CEC was listed along with IA 1287 of 1995

which came up for hearing on 1.4.2005 and this Court issued notices to the

States of Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, which are the major

sandalwood growing states of the country. This Court then passed an order on

10.2.2006 directing closure of all the unlicensed sandalwood oil extracting

factories, operating in various parts of the country. Consequently, 24

unlicensed sandalwood oil factories functioning in the State of Kerala were

closed down.

3. The State of Kerala and few other states submitted their reply to the

reports submitted by the CEC and pointed out that no private sandalwood oil

extracting units are now functioning in most of the sandalwood growing states

but only the state owned public sector undertakings. The Karnataka Soaps and

21

Detergent Ltd., a Karnataka State owned undertaking also submitted their

views. MoEF also filed a detailed affidavit before this Court stating that they

have no objection in the closure of all unlicensed sandalwood oil manufacturing

factories in the country.

4. Indian Sandalwood Association got themselves impleaded and filed

objections to the CEC Report. CEC later submitted three other reports dated

8.1.2008, 2.9.2009, 15.11.2010. CEC in the reports took the stand that the

sandalwood oil industries could be permitted to function outside the

sandalwood growing states and that import of sandalwood as such should not

be banned. The Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Karnataka

also submitted before the CEC that there are no matured sandalwood trees

available in the State of Karnataka and the State has not approved any felling

of sandalwood trees due to non-availability. State of Tamil Nadu also stated

before the CEC that no felling of sandalwood tree was officially undertaken due

to want of matured trees. State of Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh have also

filed affidavits stating that whatever little sandalwood growth was there in those

states needs to be protected and that sandalwood species is under imminent

threat. MoEF in its affidavit dated 24th October, 2010 has stated as follows:

"The Ministry supports the contention that all illegal sandalwood

oil units should be closed down. As far as closing of sandalwood

units in non-sandalwood growing States is concerned the

Ministry has "No Objection" in allowing the legal private

entrepreneur from setting up sandalwood oil units in non-

sandalwood producing States provided that only legally sourced

sandalwood for which Certificate of Origin has been obtained, is

22

used and the regulatory enforcement mechanisms, set up by the

State for detection, control and action against proceedings of

illegal units are well in place."

The CEC, however, in its report dated 2.9.2009 maintained the following

stand:

"In the light of the facts highlighted above the CEC is unable to

agree with the contention of the Applicants that they should be

permitted to establish /continue the sandalwood oil units in non-

sandalwood producing States under appropriate supervision and

regulations and that the imported sandalwood is a substitute for

Indian sandalwood. The CEC is of the considered view that if

the present state of affairs is allowed to continue, sandalwood,

so unique and a special gift of nature to India would become

extinct in the not too distant future. The protection of

sandalwood forest is simply not possible without first ensuring

that the establishment / functioning of sandalwood oil units are

severely restricted / regulated in the country particularly when

the sandalwood has become an almost extinct commodity. One

is duty bound to protect in public interest whatever sandalwood

forests are left. This is one instance where the public interest

necessarily and unhesitatingly has to take precedence over

private interest. However, sandalwood oil units, based

exclusively on imported sandalwood may be permitted in

identified locations subject to strict supervision and regulations

by the Forest Department.

5. MoEF however in its affidavit dated 24.3.2011 stated that in the light of

the non-availability of sandalwood, it would review its policy about permitting

the export of sandalwood chips and oil, particularly, with reference to its

adverse effect on the production of sandalwood in the country and also would

examine the imposition of complete ban on sale/auction of confiscated

sandalwood in view of the alarming rate at which sandalwood is disappearing

and may become extinct in not too distant future.

23

6. MoEF however in its latest affidavit dated 6.9.2011 expressed the

apprehension that the inclusion of the sandalwood species in Schedule VI in

the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 would alienate people from growing the

species on a large scale and hence it is of the view that an "All India

Sandalwood Legislation" would be an adequate solution, in the event of which it

was stated the species would be fully protected within the country and at the

same time trade could also be regulated. Ministry has also expressed the view

that sandalwood may be allotted to public sector units and that would ensure

that the artisans dealing with sandalwood would get raw materials which would

give them a greater impetus for taking up their traditional work/skills and also

give them an economic boost as well as earn foreign revenue as sandalwood

handicrafts have high demand for export.

7. The Sandalwood Oil Manufacturers Association expressed the

apprehension that the inclusion of the sandalwood as a specified plant under

the Act would not be conducive and beneficial for the cultivation and

preservation of the trees. Reference was also made to the various provisions

of Chapter IIIA of the Act and stated that the members of the Association who

have cultivation of sandalwood in the State of Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh

and involved in the business of manufacturing products using sandalwood oil if

covered by Section 17A(b) would be put to considerable difficulties. The

Association also maintained the stand that if Chapter IIIA of the Act is fully

24

implemented by declaring the sandalwood as a specified plant then it would

adversely affect the interest of the cultivators of sandalwood and would lead to

further extinction of the species.

8. We have heard the learned amicus curiae, Mr. P.S. Narasimha, Senior

Counsel Mr. Rajiv Dutta, and other counsels at length. Learned amicus curiae

referred to the affidavits filed by the MoEF and other state governments and

submitted that there is consensus among all major sandalwood growing states

and the Union of India that the export of sandalwood would be of serious threat

and may lead to the extinction of the species. Few of the states have

maintained the stand that no matured sandalwood trees are available for felling

which, according to the amicus curiae leads to the inescapable conclusion that

Indian sandalwood is in fact endangered. Learned senior counsel highlighted

the necessity of the inclusion of sandalwood in Schedule VI of the Act and

submitted that the apprehension expressed by the MoEF that it would

discourage the cultivation of sandalwood has no basis. Learned senior counsel

extensively referred to the provisions of Chapter IIIA of Act and the provisions

of Bio Diversity Act, and submitted that when we deal with the issue of an

endangered species, the question to be examined is not whether the species is

of any instrumental value to human beings, but its intrinsic worth. Learned

senior counsel extensively referred to the anthropocentric and ecocentric

approach and submitted that anthropocentric approach would depend upon the

instrumental value of life forms to human beings while ecocentric approach

25

stresses on the intrinsic value of all life forms. Learned senior counsel stressed

that the bio-diversity law departs from the traditional anthropocentric character

of environmental law and that our Constitution recognises ecocentric approach

by obliging every citizen to have compassion for all living creatures, so also the

preamble to Act. Learned counsel also submitted that public trust doctrine

developed in M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath 1997 (1) SCC 388 is based largely on

anthropocentric principles and the precautionary and polluter-pay principle

affirmed by this Court in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India

and others 1996 (5) SCC 647 are also rooted in anthropocentric principle,

since they too depend on harm to humans as a pre-requisite for invocation of

those principles.

9. Learned senior counsel also highlighted the principle of sustainable

development and inter-generational equity and stated that they too pre-suppose

the higher needs of human beings and lays down that exploitation of natural

resources must be equitably distributed between the present and future

generation. Learned senior counsel also highlighted that the above principle

would be of no assistance when a Court is called upon to decide as to when a

species has become endangered, or the need to protect irrespective of its

instrumental value. Learned senior counsel pointed out the CEC and the

States of Tamil Nadu and Kerala have produced enough materials to show that

the sandalwood trees are critically endangered and that illegal felling and trade

go on unabated and regulation on cultivation and use of sandalwood would

26

definitely be in public interest and therefore constitutional. Further it was also

pointed out that Chapter IIIA altogether does not prohibit or abolish either the

cultivation, possession or dealing in specified plants, but it merely regulates the

cultivation and use of specified plants though a licensing system of the Chief

Wildlife Warden. He therefore urged that this Court must interpret Chapter IIIA

along with the constitutional provisions and international obligations in a holistic

manner to ensure that the Central Government is duty bound to protect

sandalwood by including the same in Schedule VI of the Act.

10. Learned senior counsel, Shri Rajiv Dutta also offered his

suggestion/comments on the question of notifying sandalwood as a specified

plant under Schedule VI of the Act. The apprehension voiced by learned senior

counsel was that on such inclusion there would be blanket restrictions and

conditions covering big and small private cultivators, to farmers, to menial

vendors and hawkers who possess sandalwood and/or any part of and/or any

derivative of sandalwood in any product that uses a part of or derivative of

sandalwood. Learned senior counsel also pointed that they have no objection

in the prohibition of picking and uprooting sandalwood tree from forest area or

any area specified by notification by the Central Government but they are more

concerned with the applicability of Section 17A(b). Further it was pointed that

once it is notified as a specified plant, Section 17B would be attracted that

would only discourage the trade leading to the stoppage of many of the

sandalwood oil industries in the country. Learned senior counsel also referred

27

to Sections 17C, 17D, 17E, 17F and other relevant provisions and highlighted

the difficulties that they would experience if sandalwood is declared as a

specified plant. Learned senior counsel also pointed out that they have no

objection in imposing proper regulation in the trade of sandalwood and all India

legislation is a better option.

11. We have heard the arguments of learned senior counsel appearing on

either sides and perused the affidavits filed by various state governments,

MoEF and the reports of the CEC and other relevant materials. Sandalwood is

an evergreen tree which generally grows in the dry, deciduous forests of the

Deccan Plateau. Sandalwood is also mentioned in one of the oldest epics, the

Ramayana. Descriptions are also made by Kalidasa of its use in his literary

works as well. In short, it is part of Indian culture and heritage and its fragrance

has spread not only in India but also abroad and its rich oil content led to its

large scale exploitation as well. Exploitation of this rare endangered species

went on unabatedly, especially in the southern states of India and on

intervention of this Court, the State of Kerala has closed down 24 unlicensed

sandalwood oil factories. Similar steps were being taken by other states as

well. Before we refer to various contentions raised by counsel on either sides,

we will refer to some of the legislative measures taken by some of the states,

which are as under:

State of Kerala:

28 12. In State of Kerala best quality sandalwood trees are grown in the forest

of Marayoor, spread over 93 Sq.Km which generate the best quality

sandalwood oil in the world. Recently, the Kerala Forest (Amendment) Act,

2010 introduced a new chapter, Chapter 6A entitled "Provisions relating to

sandalwood" which regulates cutting and possession of sandalwood. Section

47A provides that no individual shall cut, uproot, remove or sell any sandalwood

tree without previous permission in writing from the forest officer. There is also

absolute prohibition on transport and possession of sandalwood or sandalwood

oil in excess of one Kilogram or 100 ml respectively without a license from the

forest officer under Section 47C of the Act. Under Section 47C(3) only the

government or the public sector undertakings (PSU) owned by the government

shall manufacture or distil, refine or sell sandalwood oil. Section 47F imposes

restrictions on purchase and sale of sandalwood from any person other than

government or authorised officer. Provision is also there for seizure of

sandalwood and its oil under Section 47H and penalty for offences can be

imposed. Act also provides for imprisonment for three years, extendable upto

seven years and fine not less than Rs.10,000/- extendable upto Rs.25,000/-.

State of Tamil Nadu

13. Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 -- Section 40G of the Act provides that

teak, blackwood, ebony, sandalwood and also ivory and teeth of elephants,

either grown or found on government land or private property are royalties and

29

no trade shall be carried on in them unless they have been duly obtained from

the government. Section 40G(2) places restrictions on felling of trees by any

person without the permission of the Chief Conservator of Forest or any other

person authorised by him. The state of Tamil Nadu has also enacted the Tamil

Nadu Sandalwood Possession Rules, 1970 and also Tamil Nadu Sandalwood

Transit Rules, 1967, and the Act also provides for imposing penalties and

imprisonment.

State of Karnataka

14. Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and the Rules made thereunder have

removed the restrictions on growing sandalwood trees in private lands. Section

83 of the Act provides that where a person is an owner of sandalwood trees

before the commencement of 2001 Amendment Act, he shall not fell or sell

such sandalwood tree or convert or dress sandalwood obtained from such tree

or possess or store or transport or sell the sandalwood except in accordance

with the provisions of the Act. The Act also provides for imposition of penalty

and imprisonment.

State of Andhra Pradesh

15. A.P. Forest Act, 1967, A.P. Sandalwood Possession Rules, 1969, A.P.

Sandalwood and Red Sanderswood Transit Rules, 1969 generally deal with the

possession, control and transit of sandalwood and Red Sanders etc., but there

30

is no restriction as such on the felling of sandalwood trees. The Act also

provides for punishment for contravention of the provisions of the Act or the

rules made thereunder.

16. State of Maharashtra has also enacted the Felling of Trees (Regulation)

Act, 1964, The Bombay Forest Rules 1942, which deal with sandalwood as

well. State of Madhya Pradesh has also enacted Madhya Pradesh Revenue

Code. States like Gujarat, Orissa have framed special provisions for dealing

with sandalwood. It is unnecessary to refer to the laws made by the various

states in the country, suffice to say lack of uniform legislation, dealing with this

endangered species, is clearly felt.

17. Article 48A of the Constitution introduced by the Constitution (42nd

Amendment) Act 1976 states that the State shall endeavour to protect and

improve the environment and safeguard the forest and wild life of the country.

Article 51A(g) states that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect

and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife

and to have compassion for living creatures. By the same constitutional

amendment Entry 17A "forest" and 17B "protection of wild animals and birds"

were included in List III - Concurrent List so that the Parliament as well as the

States can enact laws to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy as

well as various international obligations. Earlier, by virtue of Entry 20 of the

State List VII Schedule to the Constitution, namely protection of wild animals

31

and birds, only the State had the power to legislate and Parliament had no

power to make law in this regard applicable to the State unless the legislatures

of two or more states passed a resolution in pursuance of Article 252 of the

Constitution empowering the Parliament to pass necessary legislations on the

subject. However, by virtue of (42nd Amendment) Act 1976 of the Constitution,

the Parliament has got the power to legislate for the whole country.

Consequently, The Wildlife (Protection Act) 1972 was enacted by the

Parliament to provide for the protection to wild animals, birds and plants and for

matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto with a view to

ensure the ecological and environmental security of the country. The Act was

later amended and Chapter-IIIA was inserted by Act 44 of 1991 enacting

provisions for the protection of "specified plants".

18. Biological Diversity Act, 2002 was also enacted by the Parliament with the

object of conserving biological diversity, sustainable use of its components and

for fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of utilization of genetic

resources. Biological diversity includes all the organisms found on our planet

viz., the plants, animals and micro organisms. Environmental Protection Act,

1986 enacted by the Parliament empowers the Central Government under

Section 3 to take such measures for the purpose of protecting and improving

the quality of environment. When we examine all those legislations in the light

of the constitutional provisions and various international conventions like

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and

32

Flora 1973 (CITES), the Convention of Biological Diversity 1992 (CBD)

evidently, there is a shift from environmental rights to ecological rights, though

gradual but substantial. Earlier, the Rio Declaration on Earth Summit asserted

the claim "human beings are the centre of concern". U.N. Conference on

Environment and Development (UNCED-1992), was also based on

anthropocentric ethics, same was the situation in respect of many such

international conventions, that followed.

19. The public trust doctrine developed in M.C. Mehta vs. Kamalnath (1997)

1 SCC 388, is also meant to ensure that all humans have equitable access to

natural resources treating all natural resources as property and not life. That

principle also has its roots in anthropocentric principle. Precautionary principle

and polluter-pays principles affirmed by our Court in Vellore Citizens Welfare

Forum vs. Union of India and Others (supra) are also based on

anthropocentric principle since they also depend on harm to humans as a pre-

requisite for invoking those principles. The principle of sustainable

development and inter-generational equity too pre-supposes the higher needs

of humans and lays down that exploitation of natural resources must be

equitably distributed between the present and future generations.

Environmental ethics behind those principles were human need and

exploitation, but such principles have no role to play when we are called upon

to decide the fate of an endangered species or the need to protect the same

irrespective of its instrumental value.

33

20. Anthropocentrism considers humans to be the most important factor and

value in the universe and states that humans have greater intrinsic value than

other species. Resultantly, any species that are of potential use to humans can

be a reserve to be exploited which leads to the point of extinction of biological

reserves. Further, that principle highlights human obligations towards

environment arising out of instrumental, educational, scientific, cultural,

recreational and aesthetic values that forests has to offer to humans. Under

this approach, environment is only protected as a consequence of and to the

extent needed to protect human well being. On the other hand ecocentric

approach to environment stress the moral imperatives to respect intrinsic value,

inter dependence and integrity of all forms of life. Ecocentrism supports the

protection of all life forms, not just those which are of value to humans or their

needs and underlines the fact that humans are just one among the various life

forms on earth. (See Environmental Ethics, Stanford Encyclopaedia of

Philosophy 2002; Revised 2008.) The same book also gives a clear distinction

between instrumental value and intrinsic value which reads as follows:-

"In the literature on environmental ethics the distinction

between instrumental value and intrinsic value (meaning "non-

instrumental value") has been of considerable importance. The

former is the value of things as means to further some other ends;

they are also useful as means to other ends. For instance, certain

fruits have instrumental value for bats who feed on them, since

feeding on the fruits is a means to survival for the bats. However, it

is not widely agreed that fruits have value as ends in themselves.

We can likewise think of a person who teaches others as having

instrumental value for those who want to acquire knowledge. Yet, in

addition to any such value, it is normally said that a person, as a

34

person, has intrinsic value, i.e., value in his or her own right

independently for his or her prospects for serving the ends of

others. For another example, a certain wild plant may have

instrumental value because it provides the ingredients for some

medicine or as an aesthetic object for human observers. But if the

plant also has some value in itself independently of its prospects for

furthering some other ends such as human health or the pleasure

from aesthetic experience, then the plant also has intrinsic value.

Because the intrinsically valuable is that which is good as an end in

itself, it commonly agreed that something's possession of intrinsic

value generates a prima facie direct moral duty on the part of morel

agents to protect it or at least refrain from damaging it."

Above principle had its roots in India, much before it was thought of in the

Western world. Isha-Upanishads (as early as 1500 - 600 B.C) taught us the

following truth:-

"The universe along with its creatures belongs to the Lord. No

creature is superior to any other. Human beings should not be

above nature. Let no one species encroach over the rights and

privileges of other species."

21. Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi has also taught us the same

principle and all those concepts find their place in Article 51A(g) as well. The

intrinsic value of the environment as we have already indicated also finds a

place in various international conventions like, Convention for Conservation of

Antarctic Living Resources 1980, The Protocol to Antarctic Treaty on

Environmental Protection 1998, The Bern Convention on Conservation of

European Wildlife and Natural Habitats 1982, CITES, and CBD etc.

CBD in its preamble states as follows:-

"The Contracting Parties,

35

Conscious of the intrinsic value of biological and of the ecological,

genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural,

recreational and aesthetic values of biological diversity and its

components.

Conscious also of the importance of biological diversity for

evolution and for maintaining life sustaining systems of the

biosphere.

Affirming that the conservation of biological diversity is a common

concern of humankind."

India is a signatory to CBD, which also mandates the contracting parties to

develop and maintain necessary legislation for protection and regulation of

threatened species and also regulate trade therein. CITES in its preamble also

indicates that Fauna and Flora are irreplaceable part of the natural environment

of the earth and international cooperation is essential for the protection of

certain species against over exploitation and international trade.

22. CITES, to which India is a signatory, classifies species into different

appendices in the order of their endangerment, and prescribes different modes

of regulation in that regard.

23. Parties to the CITES are also entitled to take (a) stricter domestic

measures regarding conditions of trade, taking possession or transport of

specimens of species included in Appendix-I, II and III, or the complete

prohibition thereof or; (b) domestic measures restricting or prohibiting trade,

taking possession or transport of species not included in Appendix I, II or III. As

indicated earlier species listed in Appendix - II shall include all species which

36

although not necessarily now threatened with extinction may become so unless

trade in specimens of such species is subject to strict regulation in order to

avoid utilization incompatible with their survival and other species which must

be subject to regulation in order that trade in specimens of certain species

referred to earlier may be brought under effective control.

CITES and CBD highlight the following principles:-

7 The State is bound to initiate measures to identify threatened species.

7 The State is obliged to initiate measures to conserve and protect such threatened species.

7 The State is also required to formulate policies, legislation and appropriate laws to curb those practices

(including trade) that result in extinction of species.

7 The State is obliged to undertake in-situ conservation of biological diversity as it is not sufficient that a species is

cultivated elsewhere. It, ought to be protected in its

natural habitat.

Indian sandalwood (Santalum album Linn) is not seen included in the species

listed in Appendix-II of CITES, however red sandalwood (Pterocarpus

Santalinus) is seen included in Appendix-II. At the same time International

Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) which is an international organization

dedicated to finding pragmatic solutions of our most pressing environment and

development challenges has included Santalum album Linn in its Red List of

threatened species as "vulnerable" and red sandalwood (Pterocarpus

Santalinus) in the Red List as "endangered". Therefore both in CITES and in

37

the IUCN Red List of threatened species red sandalwood is described as

"threatened with extinction", "endangered". A taxon is critically endangered

when the available evidence indicates that it meets with the criteria of extremely

high risk of extinction. It is Endangered when it meets with the criteria of facing

a very high risk of extinction. A taxon is vulnerable when it is considered to be

facing a high risk of extinction. Near threatened, means a taxon is likely to

qualify for a threatened category in the near future.

24. Red sandalwood is a species of Pterocarpus native of India seen no

where in the world. It is reported that the same is found only in South India,

especially in Cuddapah and Chittoor in the States of Tamil Nadu and Andhra

Pradesh border which is also known as Lal Chandan /Rakta Chandan in Hindi

which is an endemic and endangered species. Red sandalwood possesses

medicinal properties viz., an anticoagulant, improves local circulation and used

on traumatic wounds, aberrations and bruises. Since the trading is mostly in

South India, especially in Andhra Pradesh (AP) it is stated that A.P. Forest

Corporation has been appointed as an agent to Govt. of A.P. for disposal of red

sandalwood available with Forest Department.

25. Red Sanders is an endemic and endangered species as already

mentioned, found only in the State of A.P. A.P. Government has banned the

sale of Red Sanders even by private parties, the wood is of huge demand in

Japan, China and Western world and is very costly and it is included in the

38

negative list of plant species for export purposes, implemented by the

Directorate General of Foreign Trade, Ministry of Commerce, placing

restrictions on international trade of Red Sanders. Large scale smuggling of

Red Sanders is however reported from various quarters. In order to protect the

species, a proposal was made by the State of A.P. to Government of India for

its inclusion in Schedule VI of the Act which, in our view, is justified.

26. CITES as well as IUCN has acknowledged that Red Sandalwood is an

endangered species. It is settled law that the provisions of the

Treaties/Conventions which are not contrary to Municipal laws, be deemed to

have been incorporated in the domestic law. Ref. Vellore Citizens (Supra),

Jolly George vs. Bank of Cochin (1980) 2 SCC 360, Gramaphone

Company of India vs. Birendra Baldev Pandey (1984) 2 SCC 534. Under

the above mentioned circumstances, following the ecocentric principle, we are

inclined to give a direction to the Central Government to take appropriate steps

under Section 61 of the Act to include Red Sanders in Schedule-VI of the Act

as requested by the State of A.P., within a period of six months from the date of

this judgment. We are giving this direction, since, it is reported that nowhere in

the world, this species is seen, except in India and we owe an obligation to

world, to safeguard this endangered species, for posterity. Power is also

vested with the Central Government to delete from the Schedule if the situation

improves, and a species is later found to be not endangered. 39

27. Sandalwood as such we have already indicated finds no place in CITES

but it is included in the Red List of IUCN as "vulnerable" and hence call for

serious attention by the Central Government, considering the fact that all the

sandalwood growing states have stated that it faces extinction. Section 61 of

the Act empowers the Central Government to add or delete any entry to or from

any schedule if it is known that it is expedient so to do. Section 5 deals with the

constitution of National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) which is headed by the Prime

Minister as Chairman. Section 5C deals with the functions of the NBWL which

states that it shall be the duty of the National Board to promote the conservation

and development of wildlife and forests by such measures as it thinks fit.

Section 5C(ii)(a) states that the measures may provide for promoting policies

and advising Central Government and State Governments on the ways and

means of promoting wildlife conservation and effectively controlling poaching

and illegal trade of wildlife and its products and also for reviving from time to

time the progress in the field of wildlife conservation in the country and

suggesting measures for improvement thereto. Various other powers have also

been conferred on the National Board which consists of experts in the field of

environment. In such circumstances rather than giving a positive direction to

include sandalwood in Schedule VI we are inclined to give a direction to the

Central Government to examine the issue at length in consultation with NBWL

and take a decision within a period of six months from today as to whether it is

to be notified as a specific plant and be included in Schedule VI of the Act.

40

28. We are also inclined to give a direction to the Central Government to

formulate a policy for conservation of sandalwood including provision for

financial reserves for such conservation and scientific research for sustainable

use of biological diversity in sandalwood. Central Government would also

formulate rules and regulations under Section 3 and 5 of Environmental

Protection Act 1986 for effective monitoring, control and regulation of

sandalwood industries and factories and that it should also formulate rules to

ensure that no imported sandalwood is sold under the name of Indian

sandalwood and adequate labelling to this effect be mandated for products

manufactured from or of import of sandalwood. States are directed to

immediately close down all un-licensed sandalwood oil factories, if functioning

and take effective measures for proper supervision and control of the existing

licensed sandalwood oil factories in states.

29. We are also of the view that time has also come to think of a legislation

similar to the Endangered Species Act, enacted in the United States which

protects both endangered species defined as those "in danger of extinction

throughout all or a significant portion of their range" and "threatened species",

those likely to become endangered "within a foreseeable time". The term

species includes species and sub-species of fish, wildlife and plants as well as

geographically distinct populations of vertebrate wildlife even though the

41

species as a whole may not be endangered. We hope the Parliament would

bestow serious attention in this regard. With the above directions, all the

applications are disposed of.

.....................................J.

(K.S. Radhakrishnan)

.....................................J.

(Chandramauli Kr. Prasad)

New Delhi

February 13, 2012

***