2024 SCC OnLine SC 805
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
Judges: Hon’ble Dr. Dhanajaya, Y Chandrachud (CJI), Manoj Misra.
INTRODUCTION
The taller, heavier and the larger wingspan bird had the poor eyesight as compared to other bird species. The unique variety of the bird species are to be endangered with the environment. In the International level, the UN and Government of India had made a sustainable goals and specific laws for the preservation of the environment and work hard to implement it. Globe is influenced with the concept of climate change and need to be rectified at a faster rate, in order to save their ecological and the human life.
The Great Indian Bustard are in danger and to be extinct. The last generation of these species are found in the areas of Rajasthan and Gujarat. These are considered to be an endangered species. The reason behind that endangered bird species will be pollution, rapid climate change, less number of reproductive rate and habitat loss.
The foremost judgement as regarding the climate change in an Indian context, assured the citizen as a right to free from the adverse effects of climate change to be a fundamental right under the Articles 14 and 21 of the supreme law of the nation. The eco-centric approach is needed to adopt, in order to achieve the environmental justice.
“…keeping in view, the sustainable development concept and on striking a balance the protection of the rare species is essential to be made, the effort being to save every bird while at the same time allowing transmission of power in an appropriate manner.”
FACTS
The appellant approaches the Apex Court for the protection of the Great Indian Bustard (GIB), the bird species which are in the verge of extinction. The GIBs are loss its habitat and become disappeared in our nation. The remaining numbers are struggling in the state of Gujarat and Rajasthan. The reason behind that extinction is the existence of overhead power cables in the edges of the nation.
The Apex Court overlooks upon the balance between the protection of existent GIBs species and the power cables which are in the contribution of the developing nation. But, the power line Mitigation report 2018 stated that, “Every year 1 lakh birds die because of collision with these power lines.”
So, the appellant seeks an interim direction to install predator-proof fencing and not permit the government to construct, install solar and windmill infrastructure in the areas of the wild life habitat identified by the Wildlife Institute of India.
ISSUES RAISED
- Is the expert opinion and its report is required to verify the extinction of GIBs?
- Whether the alternative way to promote the renewable resources is available?
- Is the government taken the steps for the preservation of the endangered species?
CONTENTIONS
Appellant Contention
The Appellant argued that the great Indian bustard are in danger and considered to be an “endangered species”. Its existence is reduced from day-to-day basis. So, the government had taken concern over this matter and to protect the endangered bird species in our nation.
The Counsel for appellant contended that the power transmission line is the main reason for its loss of habitats. The underground power lanes are the best way to protect the species. It proves through the report published by the Power Grid Corporation, the undergrounding of
electricity channels are more feasible and successfully implemented in the arena of Khadir region of Kutch, to save the bird species. The last generation species are struggling to live in the desert ecosystem of Rajasthan.
In further, the respondent had to install bird diverters, dismantling overhead power lines and to remove the solar panels, wind turbines and other power systems which are situated in the wildlife habitat area by the record of the government. The preventive measures like grazing policy and the grassland conservation policy must be implemented. The government prohibited the use of insecticides and pesticides that affects the species.
The Appellant requested the Concerned Ministries to look upon the conservation of the endangered natural species. The Committee had to be appointed to check and implement the directions which are given by the court. At last, the combination of two endangered species must be considered as a metapopulation.
Respondent Contention
The Counsel for respondent argued that the high-voltage wire line did not cause the death of Great Indian Bustard species due to its collision. The underground power line was not a feasible option instead of overhead of power cables.
The respondent stated the reasons for its non-feasibility:
- High Cost installation
- The underground wire line is not able to repair at a faster time due to its attachment under the soil.
- The underground power line is not feasible for the joint connections.
- It is not possible to install in all the areas.
The government also contended that the extinction of population of the specified bird species was occurred before the power lines and the transmission cables were made across the country.
The Indian government launched the program named “Habitat Improvement and Conservation Breeding of Great Indian Bustard” in 2016 to improve the conservation of these endangered species. The Part III of the Wild life (Protection) Act, 1972 covered the GIBs in their Schedule I, impliedly means that the species were granted the highest level of protection from the extinction.
In further, the respondent contended that the court appointed committee faces complications in monitoring the actions for redevelopment of the habitat of GIBs. The Committee monitored area will be the supply of sun rays and wind, which could be beneficial in generating the renewable energy and be comparatively larger than the bird dwelling region. The Government of India had signed the agreement upon the context of “Climate Change” under the United Nation in the Paris in 2015.
RATIONALE
The Apex Court observed that the need of protection of endangered bird species gained greater importance at this situation. In further, the court suggested that the companies had to fund the underground wire lines as a part of the corporate social responsibility under the section 135 of Companies Act, 2013. The Central and State government also joins handed with the funding institutions in order to practically implement the possible underground cables.
The Justice held the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change are to be as a Fundamental right. It also addressed the rapid change of climate and its adverse effects and also notified that India had made international commitments to combat climate change rooted in Kyoto Protocol and in Paris Agreement. The government need to maintain the balance between the protection of endangered species and the empowerment of development policies of renewable sources.
DEFECTS OF LAW
International Organisations and various countries had started criminalizing the act of ecocide to protect the environment from human activities. The sustainable development goals are to be achieved by the way of successful implementation of the environmental laws of the nation. The environmental laws of the nation are needed to be amended in order to include the provisions of imprisonment.
The Ministries also didn’t concern over the ecological laws. It results in the rapid change of climate and causes greater harm to the health and life of the people. The government should concern over the development policies which doesn’t harm the ecological lives.
INFERENCE
The Artificial incubation methods and insemination methods should be implemented by the union government. The facilities such as appropriate fencing for habitat restoration and predator-proof are to be installed. The conservation policies are ready to include the alternatives and the protection of eggs of the endangered bird species. The alternatives stated by the appellant in their application are needed to be considered.
At that same time, the development of the nation is to be concerned. So, the Court directed that the government had to strike a balance between the policies of protection of the endangered species as well as the developing policies. Thus, implies that the Apex Court had also concern over the development of the nation in order to achieve the status of developed nation in the International forum.
CONCLUSION
Climate change greatly affected the health of the individual which is the right guaranteed under the supreme law. In India, the environmental jurisprudence had gained its significance in the era of 1980s. The Right to clean environment is the fundamental right covered under the Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The clean environment is the way to safe from the ill-effects of climate change. The adoption of renewable technologies helps to reduce the pollution in the environment. It implies safeguards the public health.
The landmark judgment helps to balance the interplay between safeguarding the biodiversity by preservation of the Great Indian Bustard and mitigating the impacts of climate change through the interpretation of Indian Constitutional provisions and other legal framework in the green nation.
The greater harmony achieved between the ecosystem and the economic growth. It is the needy time, the government had to implement the strong environmental law with the stringent penalty provisions for the offenders. Apart from, the every individual had taken concern over the environment and the species across the nation.
REFERENCES
- Kamini Sharma, Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican Conservation: SC directs installation of bird divertors in priority areas within three months – M.K. RanjitSingh V. Union of India, SCC TIMES (2 May, 2022)
- Anmol Kaur Bawa, Protection of Great Indian Bustard: Supreme Court Relooks Earlier Directions On Undergrounding Powerlines, Forms Expert Committee, LIVELAW.IN (21 March, 2021) https://livelaw.in.
- reportable- Supreme Court of India, www.main.sci.gov.in (last visited June 16, 2024)
- Sanjay Kumar, Ranjit Singh V. Union of India, INDIANKANOON (13 December, 2019), https://indiankanoon.org.
- M P Jain, Constitution of India, 75-78 (lexis nexis Publication, Haryana, India).
- Wild life (Protection) Act, 1972, No. 53, Act of Parliament, 1972 (India).
- Companies Act, 2013, s. 135, No. 18, Acts of Parliament, 2013 (India).
BY,
K. VISWA GANESH
SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW,
TAMILNADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY,
CHENNAI.