The National Green Tribunal (NGT) directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HoFF), Andhra Pradesh to duly consider the issues of attack by the leopards within a period of three months and take appropriate remedial measures.
The Principal Bench of Justice Prakash Shrivastava, Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi and Dr. Afroz Ahmad disposed of a Suo Moto Application registered on the basis of the news item appearing in the daily newspaper dated 22.03.2024.
The news item reveals that three casualties have occurred surrounding the forest area on account of attack by the leopards in Anantapur District of Andhra Pradesh.
The news item states that the incidents suggest that water resources in the wild are on the verge of drying up on account of soaring mercury levels.
It also suggests that the animals stray into human habitations in search of food and water.
The news item contains the opinion of the District Forest Officer that the region does not have any major forest cover and it is quite depleted and runs in patches.
The news item raises substantial issue relating to compliance of the environmental norms.
“Power of the Tribunal to take up the matter in suo-motu exercise of power has been recognized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha & Ors.” reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 897.”
On advance notice, common reply on behalf of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HoFF), Andhra Pradesh and Chief Wildlife Warden, Andhra Pradesh has been filed disclosing that adequate arrangement for water within the forest has been made and the Forest Department is continuously supplying water through the tankers for filling saucer pits existing in the reserve forest. The reply also mentions that a highway is passing through the reserve forest, vehicles move at higher speed which has led to a threat to wildlife crossing the highway within the limits of reserve forest. Hence, the authorities are required to look into this issue and take appropriate remedial measures. The reply filed by Respondents No. 2 and 3 is also silent on the issue of depleting forest cover. Hence, the Bench held that the appropriate action in this regard is also required to be taken.