Plea In Supreme Court Challenges Gadgil, Kasturirangan Committee Reports, MoEF Draft Notification On Western Ghats

A public interest litigation has been filed in the Supreme Court against challenging the Draft Notification published by Central Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, demarcating over 55 sq.KM area as 'Western Ghats Ecologically Sensitive Area'. The plea has been filed by a Kerala based NGO, Karshaka Shabdam (Voice of Farmers), alleging that the notification impugned notification dated 03.10.2018 violates the right to life and livelihood of the farmers guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. In October 2018, MoEF issued a notification demarcating an area of 56,825 sq.KM spread across six states namely, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, as the Western Ghats Ecologically Sensitive Area, based on the Gadgil Committee report and the Kasturirangan committee Report. The Petitioner, through Advocate Suvidutt MS, has submitted that whereas these notifications are aimed at preserving and conserving Western Ghats, they have not considered essential factors such as population, practicality in displacement, source of livelihood etc. It is alleged that the intent of the consequent MoEF notification seems to "disrupt lives and discourage agriculture" in the State. It has urged that a direction be made to the State of Kerala to not implement the Gadgil Committee report, for the following reasons: No space to displace population from one place to another within the state;There are a large group which are completely dependent on agriculture and banning cultivation of several crops will affect their livelihood;In many villages there are small scale business run by people who uniquely produce soaps, hair oils, tubes and tyre repairs etc. which will be able to produce from that particular topography. It is also pointed out that this Report fully depends on the data received through remote sensing, which has its own set of limitations, for instance, under story plantations (eg. Cardamom) or naturalized forest plantations cannot be discriminated. Therefore, it is contended that the Report has failed to separate the cultural landscape and natural landscape in the state. The Petitioner has urged that the State of Kerala be directed to implement the recommendations of Oommen V. Oommen committee instead, as it is "beneficial" for the state of Kerala. It is submitted that this Committee made the "best suitable recommendations" for the implementation of the appropriate measures in the context of the state of Kerala taking into account the population data, environmental conservation measures, safeguarding the agricultural and basic livelihood rights of its citizen which were arrived at by determining exactly what the constituents and the general population desires and needs. The Petitioner has asserted that 'Land' is a subject under the State List as per the Constitution of India and all powers and authority to control, regulate and put it to use should vest in the state Government only. It is urged that the State Government cannot "surrender" its own authority and place the control, regulation of more of its land area under the Central Government.

Plea In Supreme Court Challenges Gadgil, Kasturirangan Committee Reports, MoEF Draft Notification On Western Ghats

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Plea In Supreme Court Challenges Gadgil, Kasturirangan Committee Reports, MoEF Draft Notification On Western Ghats

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers