E. SESHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed as a Public Interest Litigation praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings dated 19.08.2013 on the file of the fourth respondent and quash the same, insofar as it relates to permanently confining the wild elephants in captivity and to direct the respondents herein to translocate and release the said elephants in any other suitable wild area. The petitioner claims that he worked as a Wildlife Photographer in Zoological Survey of India for about 36 years and retired from service and at present, indulging in the work of conserving wildlife, nature and environment. It is stated by the petitioner that he came to know that the respondents 4 and 5 are contemplating to capture six wildlife elephants from the Javadhu Hills lying in Tiruvannamalai and Vellore Districts and deployed a team to capture all six elephants from the Tiruvannamalai District, where their movements have been reported and to separate it and transfer them to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve in Nilgiris District and Anamalai Tiger Reserve in Pollachi Taluk of Coimbatore District, from where it is proposed to cage each of the six elephants individually and such cage is technically called 'Kraal' and its size will be little more than the size of the elephants which will be trapped until it is tamed and obeys the commands of the mahouts and thereafter, the elephants will be kept in captivity throughout its lifetime. The petitioner would further state that these six elephants, forming a part of a bigger herd, have lost its home range due to human intervention and out of six elephants, four elephants are male and two elephants are females. It is further stated by the petitioner that the elephants are endangered species included in Schedule I of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and the first respondent has been spending huge amounts for protecting wild animals in India in association with international organizations like International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and as a signatory to various international treaties to protect Asian elephants.

(2.) THE petitioner also took a stand that it is the Forest Department which is duty bound to take effective steps to prevent man animal conflict and in the present case, the petitioner came to know on enquiry that the fourth respondent has already taken a hasty decision, without any transparent scientific basis to capture all the six elephants and put into Kraals and also passed an order dated 19.08.2013 to that effect and such a kind of maintenance, would cost several crores of public money.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, when there is a viable solution and a possible alternative of translocation of six elements and releasing it in the wild where there is no possibility of conflict with humans, the authorities should resort to such a method before resorting to the extreme step and separating the herd together and tranquilizing the same to the new location which is about 500 kms away from their present habitat and the possibility of death of the elephants is also not ruled out and therefore, the petitioner came forward to file the above said writ petition.