T.N.

Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

Supreme Court of India

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012
Author: K Radhakrishnan
Bench: K.S. Radhakrishnan, Chandramauli Kr. Prasad
REPORTA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I. A. Nos. 1433 and 1477 of 2005

IN

WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 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.

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 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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 1

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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. 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 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.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 2

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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 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.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 3

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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.

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 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.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 4

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 :-

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 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.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 5

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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 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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 6

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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% 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.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 7

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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.

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 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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 8

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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 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),

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 9

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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.

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 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 used and the regulatory enforcement mechanisms, set up by the

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 10

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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.

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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 11

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

considerable difficulties. The Association also maintained the stand that if Chapter IIIA of the Act is
fully 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 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 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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 12

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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:

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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 13

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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 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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 14

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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 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.

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

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 15

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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, Conscious of the intrinsic value of biological and of the ecological, genetic,
social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic values of biological

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 16

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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 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 the IUCN Red List of threatened species red sandalwood is
described as "threatened with extinction", "endangered". A taxon is critically endangered when the

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 17

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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
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.

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.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 18

 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 February, 2012

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.

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 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 ***

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/187293069/ 19