New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday sought responses from various stakeholders, including the Centre and Odisha government, on a plea against the alleged proposed constructions inside the Satkosia Tiger Reserve (STR) in the state. A bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria took note of the submissions of advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal while also asking the response of a central empowered committee. Bansal sought quashing of the no-objection certificates (NOCs) granted by district Collectors of Angul, Nayagarh, Boudh and Cuttack for the construction and development activities in and around the tiger reserve. His plea alleged unchecked expansion of tourism infrastructure and other proposed constructions in the ecologically sensitive tiger reserve. The petitioner also questioned the legality of directions issued by the district Collectors, pointing out that the provisional NOCs were granted without jurisdiction and in violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, besides forest and environmental laws. “The district Collector has issued such permissions for the construction of an eco-tourism spot. How can this be permitted,” Bansal asked. The STR, spread across the districts of Angul, Cuttack, Nayagarh and Boudh in Odisha, is a crucial habitat for tigers, elephants, and several endangered species.
The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), the plea said, in April 2018 directed all states to delineate mandatory delineation of eco-sensitive zones (ESZs) around tiger reserves. Their directions were stated to have clearly stipulated a demarcation of a minimum of a kilometre of ESZ encompassing a protected area, whenever it formed part of the buffer. There are multiple large-scale and systemic issues affecting the ecological and legal integrity of STR, which require independent attention and urgent consideration of this court, the plea said. In line with the NTCA’s April 2018 direction, the petitioner said, the Odisha government recently submitted a draft proposal for the declaration of ESZ around STR to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change for final notification.
However, the said draft, if approved in its current form, will seriously compromise the ecological integrity and conservation dignity of the tiger reserve, it is alleged. The proposed tourism-centric development activities in and around the tiger reserve, including the construction of high-impact infrastructure and grant of arbitrary NOCs, were said to be contrary to the precautionary principle and violate the statutory framework under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The zero-kilometre ESZ boundary proposed in parts of STR violates NTCA’s 2018 directive, which mandates a minimum one km buffer from core tiger habitat wherever the buffer is absent or disjunct, the plea added.
It claimed the issuance of no-objection certificates by district Collectors and non-forest authorities for tourism infrastructure within and around a notified tiger reserve constituted an unlawful usurpation of statutory powers reserved for designated authorities under the Wildlife (Protection) Act and violated the binding directives of the apex court. The plea alleged that the actions of the state government and its agencies exhibited a deliberate pattern of undermining central environmental regulations through procedural shortcuts and executive overreach, including attempts to modify ESZ notifications to dilute their protective scope for commercial tourism purposes. It also sought direction from the state to withdraw the draft ESZ proposal relating to STR.
