T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (2024)

Introduction 

This landmark judgment addresses critical environmental degradation within the Corbett Tiger Reserve (CTR), where illegal infrastructure development and mass tree felling violated the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Public Trust Doctrine. 

• The Supreme Court pronounced this decision on March 6, 2024, emphasizing an ecocentric (nature-centered) approach to environmental justice over anthropocentric (human-centered) considerations. 
• The case exposed a nexus between political and bureaucratic functionaries that enabled devastating damage to one of India's premier Tiger Reserves. 

Facts 

• The proceedings originated from a Writ Petition filed in the Delhi High Court and suo motu cognizance by the Uttarakhand High Court regarding widespread illegal activities in the Corbett Tiger Reserve. 
• Central Empowered Committee (CEC) reports revealed rampant illegal construction of bridges, buildings, and roads, including improvement to Kandi Road, carried out without requisite administrative or financial approvals. 
• Massive illegal tree felling occurred for the Pakhrau Tiger Safari site, with approximately 6,053 trees cut down, drastically exceeding the permitted limit of 163 trees. 
• The then Hon'ble Forest Minister and Divisional Forest Officer (DFO) Kishan Chand overruled recommendations from the Vigilance Department and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to execute unauthorized works worth crores of rupees. 
• The DFO involved in irregularities was protected and promoted despite previous misconduct, revealing systematic abuse of authority. 
• The Tiger Safari proposal at Pakhrau, though initiated by the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), commenced construction before final statutory clearances and changed its objective to source animals from zoos rather than exclusively rehabilitating injured or conflict tigers.

Issues Involved 

• Whether the illegal constructions and mass-scale tree felling in CTR, facilitated by nexus between political and bureaucratic functionaries, violated the Public Trust Doctrine and environmental laws? 
• Whether the 2019 NTCA Guidelines permitting sourcing of animals from recognized zoos for Tiger Safaris in buffer areas were legally valid and consistent with in-situ tiger conservation mandate under Chapter IVB of the WLP Act? 
• What restorative measures and accountability mechanisms must be implemented to remedy the massive environmental damage in the protected area?

Court’s Observations 

• The Court emphasized that environmental justice must be ecocentric (nature-centered) rather than anthropocentric (human-centered), marking a fundamental shift in judicial approach to conservation cases. 
• The Court found the actions of delinquent officials to be blatant violations of the Public Trust Doctrine, noting that the State holds forests and natural resources as trustee for the public and cannot permit their erosion for commercial or private use. 
• The Court highlighted how the nexus between a politician and forest officer caused heavy damage to the environment for political and commercial gain, demonstrating systematic abuse of public trust. 
• The Court quashed provisions of the 2019 NTCA Guidelines that permitted relocation of zoo-bred animals into Tiger Safaris in buffer zones, declaring them totally contrary to the purpose of tiger conservation. 
• The Court restored the strict mandate of the 2016 Guidelines that only injured, conflicted, or orphaned tigers unfit for re-wilding may be exhibited in such facilities. 
• The Court applied the Principle of Ecological Restitution, derived from international jurisprudence (including the Chorzow Factory Case), holding that the State must not only prevent future harm but also wipe out all consequences of illegal acts. 
• While noting non-compliance with site selection criteria for the Pakhrau Safari, the Court refrained from interfering with the 80% complete establishment but mandated strict adherence to 2016 Guidelines for animal sourcing. 
• The Court directed that a rescue centre be relocated near the Pakhrau Safari site to ensure proper rehabilitation facilities for genuinely distressed tigers. 
• The Court ordered the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) to constitute a Committee to assess and quantify environmental damage, identify responsible persons and officials, and ensure cost of restoration is recovered from delinquent individuals. 
• The Court directed that CBI investigation and disciplinary proceedings against delinquent officers be actively monitored by the Supreme Court itself, ensuring accountability for egregious abuse of power.

Conclusion 

• This landmark judgment reinforces the supremacy of environmental protection and conservation principles over anthropocentric developmental activities in ecologically fragile zones. 
• The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals but issued extensive directions to secure effective management and restoration of the Corbett Tiger Reserve. 
• The decision establishes strong accountability mechanisms for officials who violate environmental laws, mandating recovery of restoration costs from responsible individuals. 
• The judgment clarifies that tiger conservation must prioritize in-situ conservation and rehabilitation of genuinely distressed animals over commercial exploitation through zoo-bred animal exhibitions.