Guwahati: The Assam Government’s ambitious plans to establish zoos and wildlife safaris in Dibrugarh and Cachar districts have hit a roadblock following a Supreme Court’s order issued on Monday.
The top court on Monday issued an interim direction while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the 2023 Forest Conservation Act amendments.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The order states that “…any proposal for the establishment of zoo/safaris referred to in the Wildlife Protection Act 1972 owned by Govt or any authority in forest areas other than protected areas shall not be finally approved save and except with the prior permission of this Court.”
This effectively mandates the Assam government to seek Supreme Court’s approval before proceeding with the two projects in question. Both the proposed safari zoos, planned for Dholai (Cachar) and Tingkhong (Dibrugarh), fall under this category as they utilize non-protected notified forest land.
The Dholai safari-zoo, envisioned at a cost of Rs 214.54 crore, would occupy 180 hectares of forest area approximately 30 kilometers away from Silchar.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
Similarly, the Tingkhong project planned in the Namdang Reserve Forest spans about 150 hectares, and is proposed to be established at an estimated budget of Rs 250 crore.
With the Supreme Court’s orders, the future of these projects hangs in delicate balance until they receive explicit court permission.
Additionally, the court’s fresh directions mandate that the states and union territories are now required to adhere to the definition for “forest” established in the 1996 T.N Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India judgment.
In other words, the Forest Conservation Act will become applicable to any land fitting into the dictionary meaning of “forest,” a position that the 2023 amendment wanted to do away with.
It is noteworthy that the Assam’s PCCF & HoFF has been facing a number of allegations that he had diverted notified forest land for non site-specific purposes without seeking permission from the Central Government under the Forest Conservation Act, by misleadingly interpreting certain non forestry activities as activities ancillary to forest conservation.
He was also accused of misleading the government by submitting flawed proposals for personal gain.
Accusations have time and again surfaced regarding illegal diversion of several hectares of notified forest land for various projects within Assam.
In one such matter, National Green Tribunal (NGT) has taken suo-moto cognizance following a news report appeared on Northeast Now.
With the apex court once again getting into the definition of forest land, and diversion of forest land for non-forestry purposes, environmentalists are expecting the matters to quickly heat up.