Justice Gavai's Bench Expresses Concerns About Possibility Of Conflicting Orders After CJI- Bench's Direction On Zoos Within Forests

Earlier this week, a Supreme Court bench led by the Chief Justice of India passed an interim order that zoos/safaris should not be allowed within forest areas without prior obtaining prior permission from the Court.

However, another bench led by Justice BR Gavai had earlier reserved judgment on the very same issue. Today, Justice Gavai asked the Additional Solicitor General of India Aishwarya Bhati if she had informed the CJI's bench about this fact.

The exchange went as follows :

Justice Gavai: Madam, you did not appear in the Forest Conversation Matter before the first court (CR1)? 

ASG Bhati: I did my lords. 

Justice Gavai: But then did you not inform the Court that we are seized of the matter and had heard all the issues? 

ASG Bhati: I did my lords 

Justice Gavai: We heard those matters for two-three days

ASG Bhati: Yes my lords, I informed the bench . Mr Prashant Bhushan was showing the interim order to the court, I told the Court that the judgement is reserved and we have also undertaken to abide by it...I said the process is being strengthened. But my lords the First Court said that as an interim order any permissions should first come to this court

Justice Gavai: It should not unnecessarily lead to some conflicting order 

ASG Bhati then clarified that it was only an interim order passed by the CJI's bench.

Justice Gavai, seemingly concerned about any possible conflicting directions asked "So far as the directions are concerned?" 

The ASG answered, " My lords the only one-line direction is that for establishing any zoos/ safaris in the forest, the permission of this Court will be required, that's the only direction and as an interim direction, it's there." 

On February 19, a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra directed the States and Union Territories to comply with the dictionary meaning of 'forests', as laid down in the 1996 judgment in the TN Godavarman Thirumalpad v Union of India case, till the identification of forests as per the 2023 amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act is completed. The bench also directed 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." The interim order was passed in a batch of writ petitions challenging the 2023 amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act.

The 'TN Godavarman' matter, an omnibus forest protection matter in which the top court issued the longest-standing continuing mandamus in the field of environmental litigation,  is being handled by the bench led by Justice Gavai. In February 2023, the bench led by Justice Gavai recorded prima facie disapproval of the practice of setting up zoos in Tiger safaris.

"Prima facie, we do not appreciate the necessity of having a zoo inside the tiger reserves or national parks. The concept of protecting these is to permit animals to reside in their natural environs and not artificial environs. We, therefore, also call upon the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) to explain the rationale behind permitting such safaris within tiger reserves and national parks. Until further orders, the authorities are restrained from making any constructions within the core areas of national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and tiger reserves," the bench noted in the interim order.