National Wildlife Board Not Holding Annual Sittings, Powers Delegated To Standing Committee : Centre Tells Supreme Court

The Supreme Court yesterday admitted and fixed for final hearing a public interest litigation assailing the non-sitting of National Board for Wildlife atleast once every year in terms of Rule 4(1) of the National Board for Wildlife Rules, 2003. The hearing is scheduled to take place after 6 months.

A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti passed the order, upon hearing Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati (for the Union), who informed, pursuant to an earlier Court query, that though the Board has not assembled for some time, a Standing Committee delegated with its powers has been carrying out the works. As such, non-sitting of the Board is not adversely impacting the working of the statutory body in terms of the Act.

To state briefly, the petitioner raised a grievance about the non-sitting of the Board, claiming that it had not met for several years. According to him, the objective of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 was not being given the degree of earnestness it deserved.

In response, the Union filed a counter-affidavit, stating that under Section 5B of the Act, the Board can constitute a Standing Committee for exercising such powers and performing such duties as may be delegated to it by the Board. On the last date, it was informed that such a Committee had been constituted and was being headed by the Minister In-charge of Environment and Forest. ASG Bhati, on behalf of the Union, further mentioned that the Committee ordinarily meets once in every 3 months and since its constitution, has held around 72 meetings. As such, requisite attention is being given to the responsibilities under the Act.

As against this, the petitioner contended that the Board is required to sit at least once a year as per Rule 4(1) of the 2003 Rules. Accordingly, the court directed the ASG to obtain instructions.

Yesterday, the ASG conceded that the allegation regarding non-sitting of the Board atleast once a year was factually correct. She however placed reliance on Section 5B of the Act and said that complete powers have been delegated on the Standing Committee, which meets periodically and is discharging the functions.

"We have placed on record some decisions that have been taken to show that the object and purpose of the Act is very well being carried out", submitted the ASG. She added that every decision taken by the Standing Committee is sent to the Centrally Empowered Committee (constituted by the Court) and every order of the Board, through CEC, can be challenged before the Supreme Court.

"The mechanism available is robust and in consonance with the object of the Act", the ASG said further.

Senior Advocate Sanjay Upadhyay, for the petitioner, countered the above submissions saying that the ASG had completely misread the object of the Act. He pointed out that the National Board for Wildlife was initially illegally constituted. Against the same, the same petitioner approached the Supreme Court and thereafter, the Board was re-constituted.

It was contended that as per Rule 4(1) of the 2003 Rules, the Board is required to first sit and then, it can delegate the powers. "The wildlife of the country has to receive the highest attention. That is why the law was made and amended", Upadhyay added.

After hearing the counsels, the bench fixed the matter for final hearing.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan also appeared for the petitioner.

Case Title: CHANDRABHAL SINGH Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR., W.P.(C) No. 1284/2020