All India Mobile Zoo Owners & ... vs U.O.I & Ors.
2000 Latest Caselaw 765 Del

ORDER

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondents have been heard or some time. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, in view of the subsequent developments, is confining his prayer in the writ petition to prayer D only, which is in the following terms:-

"Issue a writ of mandamus directing payment of adequate compensation of Rs. 15-20 lacs in the event of the closure of the Zoo in implementation of the rejection order or upon surrendering the animals."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the challenge to the order, rejecting the recognition of their Mobile Zoos under Section 38(H) of the Wild Life Act, had failed, petitioners were left with no other alternative but to surrender the animals. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this has been so recorded in the order dated 19.5.1998, wherein it was agreed that animals would be surrendered before the respective Chief Wild Life Wardens of the 3 U.P. and 10 Bihar State Mobile Zoos on or before 21.7.1998. It was further agreed that the question with regard to the compensation would be taken up on the next date of hearing by which time the learned counsel for the respondents would also seek instructions.

3. The question of compensation does not appear to have been considered by the Court in the subsequent hearings. Petitioner had moved CM. Nos.5961/98 & 9939/98, claiming compensation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's life was wholly dependent on the animals, which they surrendered, and they deserve to be compensated for the same.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent, Mr. Raj Panjwani, relies on the Full Bench decision in M/s. Ivory Traders and Manufacturers Association & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors, and G.R. Simon & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., . He submits that in view of the Full Bench decision and the fact that the statute does not provide for any compensation being paid in respect of the animals, the holding and possession of which was not legal, the petitioner would not be entitled to any compensation. Learned counsel submits that nevertheless the respondent has averred in the reply that they are willing to consider the payment of ex gratia amount. Respondent No.2 in the reply to the application for grant of compensation has averred as under:-

"Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of parties, the individual zoo owners may furnish such particulars including income-tax returns with the answering respondent to enable it to submit an appropriate response as to whether any ex-gratia amount can be paid to the petitioners. It is made clear that submission of such document by the zoo owners would not automatically entitle them for any relief."

5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioners would apply for grant of ex-gratia compensation for animals, the holding and possession of which was not permissible under the Act.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that in case appropriate applications are made by the petitioner giving the particulars of the animals and other particulars, as required, the same would be considered for the grant of ex-gratia compensation.

7. Learned counsel also explains that as regard animals, the possession and holding of which was not illegal under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, but were surrendered to the Authorities, the petitioner may submit its claim to the Chief Life Warden of the respective States for compensation giving their respective values.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would file their appropriate applications for grant of ex-gratia compensation as well as for compensation for the animals, which were surrendered but holding and possession of which were not prohibited under the Wild Life Act.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

8. The above Order will also dispose of connected writ petition bearing Nos. 2531/95, 4367/96, 4742/96 and 4681/96.