Ikra vs Chief Wild Life Warden & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 2893 UK

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
             AT NAINITAL
                    SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

September 29, 2023

Writ Petition No. 2765 of 2023 (M/S)

Ikra ............Petitioner Versus Chief Wild Life Warden & Ors. .......Respondents.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate.

Counsel for the respondents: Mr. K.K. Shah, Addl. C.S.C.

Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following Order:

1. In this petition, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs:-

i. Issue a writ order or direction setting aside the ongoing gypsy vehicle registration process 2023.24 being conducted by respondent no. 2in a non- transparent manner creating monopoly and which is in violation of the directions issued by this Hon'ble court and is opposed to the guidelines issued by respondent no. 1 in this regard.

ii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents to carry out the fresh registration of the Gypsy Cab Vehicles for the Corbett Tiger Reserve , Ramnagar, District Nainital for the tourism year 2023-24 with complete transparency strictly in accordance of the direction issued by the Hon'ble court WPMS No. 2632 of 2017 vide order 05.07.2017 and judgment dated 25.08.2017 passed in SPA No. 541 of 2017 (contained as Annexure no. 8 & 9 respectively) and the guidelines issued by respondent no. 1 in this regard. iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents to strictly follow the transparent guidelines issued by respondent no. 1 pursuant to the directions of this Hon'ble Court regarding gypsy registration in CTR as contained in the goggle form for registration of gypsy vehicles including publication of advertisement in two newspapers and selecting the owners through lottery with complete transparency as provided in the guidelines issued by respondent no. 1 in this regard and to conduce a physical verification of the owners/drivers.

2. The counsel for the petitioner referred the judgment dated 05.07.2017, rendered by this court in WPMS No. 2632 of 2016, Prem Singh Mehra & ors. Vs. State of Uttarakhand & ors., which was also affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court by judgment and order dated 25.08.2017 in SPA No. 541 of 2017, Pawan Puri & Ors. Vs. Prem Singh Mehra & Ors. Both the judgments are enclosed as Annexure 8 and Annexure 9 to the writ petition. Mr. Mainali, petitioner's counsel informed to this Court that the judgment of Division Bench has not been assailed before the Hon'ble Apex Court.

3. The learned Single Judge, in WPMS No. 2632 of 2016 has issued the directions which are necessary to be extracted hereunder:-

2. As per the policy of the Forest Department and the Chief Wild Life Warden, the only permitted vehicle inside the national park is a "Maruti Gypsy Model" jeep which is allowed to ply inside the Corbett Tiger Reserve for the purposes of "Safari". As per the guidelines issued by the Chief Wild Life Warden vide order dated 02.12.2013, which is Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition, a maximum number of 250 vehicles can be registered for the said purposes. In these guidelines issued vide order dated 02.12.2013, certain instructions have also been issued as to the registration of the vehicle, make of the vehicle, colour of the vehicle, the health and the fitness of the vehicle, experience of the driver and owner, etc.

3. The provision for permitting the vehicle is given under Section 28 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (from hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Section 28 of the Act reads as under:-

"Section 28. Grant of Permit.- (1) The Chief Wild Life Warden may, on application, grant to any person a permit to enter or reside in a sanctuary for all or any of the following purposes, namely:-

(a) investigation or study of wild life and purposes ancillary or incidental thereto;

(b) photography;

(c) scientific research;

(d) tourism; (e) transaction of lawful business with any person residing in the sanctuary.

(2) A permit to enter or reside in a sanctuary shall be issued subject to

such conditions and on payment of such fee as may be prescribed."

4. From the above provision, it is clear that a permit is granted to a person to enter the park for the purposes of investigation, or study of wildlife, photography, scientific research, tourism, etc. Sub- section (2) of Section 28 of the Act further provides that "a permit to enter or reside in a Sanctuary shall be issued, subject to such conditions and on payment of such fee, as may be prescribed".

5. This Court has been informed that there is no separate provision under the Act for grant of any other permit for plying of vehicles and presently a permit which is given by the authority i.e. Chief Wild Life Warden is for plying of a vehicle of a particular make i.e. Gypsy under the above provision alone. The maximum numbers of vehicles which can be registered are 250 vehicles.

6. Petitioners claim that they are the owners of the vehicles and being local residents of Ram Nagar, it is not only their wish but also a legitimate expectation that they would be allowed to ply their vehicles inside the Corbett Tiger Reserve, subject to the policy. All the same, two conditions are coming in their way for the grant of this permit. One is the condition, which is being given under the directions of the Chief Wild Life Warden vide order dated 02.12.2013, which is contained in 11(2) and (3) which say that all such "vehicle owners", will be given priority who have already provided three years of satisfactory service. Secondly, there is no restriction on a permit inasmuch as there are cases where more than one permit is granted to a person or several permits granted in favour of different member of a single family.

4. In the judgment, as referred to above, particular direction has been issued in para 16 that the Chief Wild Life Warden while undertaking the exercise for the grant of a license beyond 30.09.2017, shall make a publication in at least two newspapers having wide circulation in the area, inviting applications from eligible owners and drivers of the vehicles who have at least three years of satisfactory experience, either as a driver or as owner of the vehicle.

5. The relief, as sought, in this petition is based on the ground as mentioned in para 27 of the petition wherein it is contended that no advertisement in any newspaper was issued despite there being a direction that the publication

shall be made in two newspaper as per the judgment rendered by this Court. However, instead of publication in any widely circulated newspaper, respondent no. 1 and 3 herein gave a link of a google form for gypsy registration to some private agents for the tourism year 2023-24, which was circulated by those agents in whatsapp group of their own choice. A copy of whatsapp message is also brought on record as annexure 4 to the writ petition.

6. In para 28, it is contended that google link given by the private agents of respondent nos. 2 and 3 for gypsy registration is not available on the official website of respondent no.2.

7. Mr. Mainali, the counsel for the petitioner in reference to this submits that it is a glaring example of monopoly, created by respondent no. 2 and 3 for gypsy registration and it appears from the whatsapp message circulated in google link which reads as under:-

"uksV% bl vkosnu i= dks dsoy ogh okgu Lokeh o pkyd Hkjsaxsa tks foxr i;ZVu o"kZ 2022&23 esa dkWCksZV Vkbxj fjtoZ esa okgu Lokeh o pkyd ds :I esa iathd`r FksAß

8. Mr. Mainali, counsel for the petitioner further submits that google message clearly reveals that respondent no. 2 and 3 wants monopoly and it appears that only those vehicle owners were permitted to be registered who was earlier registered in the tourism year 2022-23. He further submits that inviting applications by google link and not in official web-site of the department amounts to contempt of the judgments rendered by this Court dated 05.07.2017 passed in WPMS No. 2632 of 2016 affirmed by the Division Bench vide judgment and order dated 25.08.2017 in SPA No. 541 of 2017.

9. This Court, at this stage, after hearing arguments of Mr. Mainali, counsel for the petitioner requires response by way of counter affidavit from the respondents.

10. Let response, by way of counter affidavit, be filed by the respondents positively within a period of three weeks from today.

11. List this matter on 30.10.2023 before the appropriate Bench.

12. In the meantime, ongoing gypsy vehicle registration process for tourism year 2023-24, being conducted by respondent no. 2 for Corbett Tiger Reserve (CTR) shall be kept in abeyance.

13. Stay application stands disposed of.

__________________ RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

Parul