G RAJENDRAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition, in public interest, was preferred by the petitioner-in-person for direction on 1st and 2nd respondents to conduct post-mortem of elephants and other animals only in presence of the 4th respondent, the Regional Deputy Director, Wildlife Preservations, Ministry of Environment and Forests, an officer of the Union of India and his Veterinarian and to take steps against erring forest officials of the State.

(2.) THE petitioner-in-person highlighted certain facts to suggest inefficiency on the part of State Forest Officials, who do not take proper care of the elephants and other animals. According to him, on 29th Sept., 2002, in the evening, he received a telephonic message that some anti-social elements were illegally strolling away male elephants with babies for making use of "Tusk" and forcibly carried away a baby elephant. THE locals chased away those miscreants, who escaped after throwing away the baby elephant near Masinagudi Check Post. THE baby elephant was four months old and required milk feeding, but no follow-up action was taken by State Forest Officials to reunite the baby elephant with the herds for three days. THE 3rd respondent and his subordinates took no responsibility of follow-up action, which resulted in desertion of baby elephant, who wandered without milk here and there and, ultimately, collapsed due to starvation. In another incident, an elephant, which was under the captivity of the 3rd respondent, died due to negligence, which can be proved beyond doubt. Though the 3rd respondent was knowing about the injury of a female elephant due to snooze on the left leg and was wandering near the road side of Masinagudi village, but his subordinate officers caught the elephant on 3rd Sept., 2002, removed the snooze and gave sedative injection to the elephant. Due to overdose of sedative medicine, the elephant died as reported in the newspaper "THE Hindu" on 5th Sept., 2002. Further case of the petitioner is that though his men asked the wildlife warden not to give excess dosage, which may harm the elephant and also supplied imported medicine to save the elephants in case of danger to its life, but the doctors and warden refused to take assistance of petitioner or his men. THE medicine given to elephants is "Xylazine", but no antidotes are kept for emergency, if excess does is given. Many of the times it causes harm to the elephants. It is in this background it was submitted that post-mortem should be conducted only in the presence of the 4th respondent so that the truth may come to the light of the people.

(3.) THE petitioner submitted that atleast post-mortem should be done in presence of some independent person or any Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). In case of negligence on the part of the State Forest Officials, correct position may be reflected in the post-mortem report. But such submission cannot be accepted as it cannot be presumed that in case of negligence of duty, the Veterinarian of the State will not submit a correct post-mortem report. If the petitioner wants that NGO's should be involved in the matter for assisting the State officials at the time of post-mortem of elephant or other protected animals, he may approach the State and the State, in its turn, may allow the same.