Supreme Court Hears Writ Petition Challenging State Order Permitting Tendu Leaf Collection in National Parks and Sanctuaries. Petitioner Contends Order Violates Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Public interest litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the legality and constitutional validity of a State Government order permitting collection of tendu leaves from National Parks and Sanctuaries.

Petitioner sought quashing of the order dated March 28, 1995 and prohibition on commercial exploitation of tendu leaves from protected areas to preserve ecology and wildlife.

The petitioner, an environmentalist, contended that the order was ultra vires the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and violated Articles 14, 21, 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution; it was alleged to be mala fide and against public interest.

The State of Madhya Pradesh had earlier banned commercial exploitation of minor forest produce from National Parks and Sanctuaries; the ban was lifted by order dated April 16, 1992, then cancelled by order dated December 13, 1994, and partially modified by the impugned order dated March 28, 1995. No final notifications under Sections 26A and 35 had been issued for most areas, so traditional rights of villagers had not been acquired or compensated.

Whether an area declared as a Sanctuary and National Park under Section 18 and Section 35, respectively, of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 can be exploited for the collection of minor forest produce in violation of the restrictions contained in the said Act? Whether the State Government has the right to exploit minor forest produce from the sanctuaries and National Parks which have been so declared for the protection and preservation of ecology, flora, fauna, geomorphologies, natural or zoological significance?

Petitioner argued that the impugned order was ultra vires the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 because it allowed commercial exploitation of tendu leaves through contractors from protected areas, contrary to the object and spirit of the Act. Petitioner contended that the order violated Articles 14, 21, 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution by endangering ecology, environment and wildlife; the presence of humans and collection of tendu leaves would harm flora and fauna, scare away wildlife, damage soil, and increase forest fire risk. Petitioner submitted that non-issuance of a fresh notification under Section 26A after the 1991 amendment did not remove protection extended by Sections 27 to 34 for sanctuaries originally declared under Section 18. Respondents argued that the petition was not maintainable under Article 32 as no fundamental right of the petitioner was violated and the petitioner lacked locus standi based on Articles 14, 21, 48A and 51A(g). Respondents contended that traditional rights of villagers living in and around National Parks and Sanctuaries, where final notification under Sections 26A and 35 had not been issued, could not be questioned until those rights were acquired, compensation paid, and villagers rehabilitated; the State Government had the right to exploit minor forest produce. Respondents stated that tendu leaf collection was done departmentally under strict supervision, the practice of setting fire to tendu bushes had been stopped, and a special cell of police and forest officials supervised the forest area to protect wildlife and curb poaching; the petition was based on suspicion and misconceived apprehension. Intervenors, claiming to be tribals, argued that they depended on minor forest produce for survival, their collection of tendu leaves during the forty-day season was on token payment, they did not disturb flora, fauna or ecosystem, and forest fires were caused by racketeers and contractors, not by them.

Keeping in view the traditional rights of the villagers living around the boundaries of those National Parks and sanctuaries in respect of which the final notification U/s 26-A and 35 have not been issued, the blocks/areas earmarked for collection of tendu leaves would be reopened as done in the past. Whether an area declared as a Sanctuary and National Park under Section 18 and Section 35, respectively, of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 can be exploited for the collection of minor forest produce in violation of the restrictions contained in the said Act? Whether the State Government has the right to exploit minor forest produce from the sanctuaries and National Parks which have been so declared for the protection and preservation of ecology, flora, fauna, geomorphologies, natural or zoological significance? The presence of human beings, albeit in earmarked Parks, will not only adversely affect the flora and the fauna but will also scare away wild life. The collection of tendu leaves is a destructive process and can cause extensive damage to ecology and regeneration of trees etc. The traditional rights of the villagers living in and around the boundaries of the National Parks and Sanctuaries in respect of which the final notification under Sections 26A and 35 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 has not been issued, cannot be questioned till the same has been acquired; due compensation has been paid and the villagers have been rehabilitated. The practice of setting fire to tendu bushes has been completely stopped and only pruning operations are permitted under strict supervision and no pruning is done by setting fire to bushes or trees in the forest.

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the State Government order dated March 28, 1995. The Supreme Court issued notice on April 20, 1995. Respondents Nos. 2 to 4 filed a counter affidavit through the Chief Conservator of Forests (Production). The petitioner filed a rejoinder. Three persons claiming to be tribals filed I.A. No. 3 of 1995 seeking intervention. The matter was heard and judgment was delivered on May 10, 1996.

• Constitution of India: Article 14, Article 21, Article 32, Article 48A, Article 51A(g)
• Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972: Section 18, Section 26, Section 26A, Section 35, Sections 19 to 25, Sections 27 to 34
• National Park Act, 1955: