Dismissed

Nature Park Walkers Asociation, Hyd v. Prl Secy, Forest Dept., Hyd and 2 Ot

Telangana HC21 Feb 2022PIL/303/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL challenged the enhancement of entry fees for Kasu Brahmananda Reddy National Park as arbitrary and violative of constitutional rights. The Court examined the statutory provisions and the costs incurred for maintaining the park, holding the fees reasonable and dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for a writ of mandamus to set aside the Government Order enhancing entry permit fees and directing fee concessions was dismissed.

Nature Park Walkers Asociation, Hyd Vs Prl… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶4

MONDAY, THE TWENTY^{FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY} TWO IHOUSAND AND^{TWENTY TWO}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE THE^{CHIEFJUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA} AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI}

¶7

PIL NO: 303 OF 2014

¶8

Between:

¶9

NATUREPARKWALKERSASOC|ATION,Banlarahills,JubliHills,R.eOd.No' 'iSbiS]ee, RegO oficJat ptot no.1288, Road No:65 Jubli_ee Hills, HyderabadSoOoSa h"pty^{rts Secretary Mr. Rahul Singhal, S/o G S Sarraf('?lgLr,r,or=*}

¶10

AND

¶11

nt of Forest,

¶12

1 State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Departme} Secretariat, Hyderabad. st Force

¶13

2 ifre^principat bhief^{Conservatorof Forests, (Headof the Fore} {HOFF}). Telanqana, HYderabad.

¶14

3 tfre Oiiisionat iorest Officer^{(DFO) , (Wild Life lt/anagement} {WLM}),^Kasu Bramhanandha^{Reddy National Park. Hyderabad'} ...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitution of lndiapraying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith, the High court may be} pleased

¶16

,l.toissueaWritorderordirectionmoreappropriatelyawritofmandamus declaring the action^{of the respondentsin issuing G.O.Rt.No.26,Di]. 19-7-2014 by} the .1 st Respondent and subsequent orders passed by the Respondent No.2 vide R.C.No.837/2014/WL-1 , dated:^{1o-11-2014 in enhancingthe entry permit fees into} the KBR National^{Park as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violation article} 14 & 21 of the constitution^{of lndia andconsequentlyset aside the G.C.Rt.No.} 26, dt: 19- 7-2014 and^{R.C.No.B37/20141WL'1,dated: 10-11-2014'}

¶17

2.TodirecttheRespondentsnottorejectissuingtheAnnualEntryPermits to who are ready^{to pay the Annual Entry PermitFee'}

¶18

To direct^{the Respondentsto considerthe starting age from 60 years for} Menand58YearsforWomenforgivingFeeConcessionstotheSeniorCitizensin issuing^{yearly entry permits, monthly entry permits and daily entry permits}

¶19

i I

¶20

LA. NO: 1 OF 2014(Pl LMP. NO: 451 OF 2014\

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceeding in G.O.Rt.No. 26, dt 19-7-2014 and R.C.No. 83712014ML-1 , dated: 1O-11-2O14 issued by the 1st Respondent pending disposal of the Writ Petition

¶22

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016 in PIL)MP. NO: 129 0F 2016

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner to file the Resolution Copy, authorizing the Secretary to file present Public lnterest Litigation, issued by the Petitioner's Association i.e., Nature Park Walkers Association, daled: 22-06-2016 for the purpose of placing in the record in the above said Public lnterest Litigation

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI Y. BALAJI

¶25

Counsel for Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

¶28

¶29

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶30

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶31

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.303 OF 2OL4

¶32

ORDER,^p"' rr,. Hon'bte the chteJ Jusnce satish Chandra stama)

¶33

The petitioner belore this Court, Nature Park Walkers Association, Banjara Hills-Jubilee Hi1ls, has liled this^public interest litigation being aggrieved by the action of respondents/ State in issuing G.O.Rt.No.26 dated^19.O7.2014 cnhancing Lhe entry fee for entering Kasu Brahmananda^Reddy National Park (for short "the KBR Park"), which is a^Wildlife Sanctuary notified by the Government of Andhra^{Pradesh in} exercise ol power conferred under Sub-section⁽⁴⁾ of Section³⁵ ol the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972^(for short "the Act").^The contention of the peti tioner / Association is that in the^{KBR Park,} there is an entry fee for permitting the^people to^have a^walk every morning and evening and the^{petitioner/Associationis} basically aggrieved by the enhancement of the^{entryfee by the} respondents/ State. The prayer of the^{petitioner/Associationis} reproduced as under:-

¶34

'1. To issue a^{r.vrit orcler} or^{directionmoreappropriatelya} rvrit of mandamus declaring^{the actionof the respondentsin} issuing C.O.Rt.No.26,^{Dti19-7-20L4by the l"! Respondent} and subsequent orders^{passedby the RespondentNo'2 vide} R.C.No.837/20141WL-1,^{dated 1O-11-2014in enhancingthe}

¶35

i I

¶36

entry^{permitfees into the KBR National Park as illegal,} arbitrary, without^{jurisdiction and violatiolt article 14 & 21 of} the Constitution^{of India andconsequt:nthset asidethe} G.O,Rt.No.26 dt:^{1g-7-2O14 andR.c.No.837l20l'4lwL-1,} dated 10-11-2014.

¶37

2 To d.irect the Respondents^{not to rejectissuingthe} Annual Entry Permits^{to u'ho are readv to pal the Annual} Entry Permit^Fee.

¶38

3 To direct the Respondents^{to consider the starting age} from 60 years for^{Men and58 Years for Womenfor givingFee} Concessions to the Senior^{Citizens in issuingyearly entry} permits monthly entry^{permitsand daily entrypermitsand} Pass such other order^{or ordersas thisHon'bleCourt may} deems fit and^{properin the circumstances of the case and in} the interest of^justice."

¶39

Earlier also, a writ^{petition was preferredi e',} W.P.No.22575 of 2Ol4^{challenging the very same Government} Order i.e., G.O.Rt.No.26^{dated 19.O7.2014.A Division Bench of} this Court has directed^{the respondents to treat the writ petition} as a representation and to^{pass appropriate order in accordance} with law.

¶40

Sections 27 and 28 of the Act read as under:-

¶41

Restriction on entry in sanctuary.-(l) No person other than,-

¶42

(a) a public servant on duty,

¶43

(b) a person who has been permitted by the Chief Wild Life Warden or the authorised officer to reside within the limits of the sanctuaiy,

¶44

¶45

{

¶46

(d) a person^{passingthrough the sanctuary along a} public h'ighrvaY,^and

¶47

{e)^{the dependants of the person referredto in clause}

¶48

(a), clause^{(b) or clause(c)'}

¶49

shall enter^{or residein the sanctuary'except under and in} accordance^{withthe conditionsof a permitgrantedunder} section^28.

¶50

(2) Every^{person shall, so long as he residesin the sanctuary'} be bound-

¶51

(ti) to l)rc<sup>cllr tl-rcc ollnlissio:-r'in the sanctuary,of an offence^{against this Act;}

¶52

(b) where^{there is reason to believe that any such} offence^{against this Act has been committedin such} sanctuary,^{to help in discoveringand arresting the} offender;

¶53

(c) to report^{the death of any wild anilnal and to} safeguard^{its remains until theChief Wild LifeWarden} or the^{authorisecl officer takes charge thereof;}

¶54

(d) to extinguish^{any fire in such sanctuary of which} he has^{knorvledgeor information and to prevent from} spreadirrg.^{br anr laufttlITleans in his porver'any fire} \,ithin the^{vicinit\of such sanctuary oI rvhich he has} litrolvleclge^{or illfolnratiorl; all'l}

¶55

(e) to assist^{any ForestOfficer' Chiel Wild Life} Warden ,^{Wild Life Wardenor PoliceOfficerdemanding} his aid^{for preventingthe commissionof any offence} against^{this Act or in the investigation of any such} offence

¶56

(3) No^{personshall'with intentto causedamageto any} boundary-mark^{of a sanctuaryor to causewrongful gain as} defined^{in the lndianPenal Code' 1860 (45 of 1860)' alter'} destroy,^{moveor defacesuchboundary-mark'}

¶57

(4) No person^{shalltease or molest any wildanimal or litter} the^{grounds of sanctuarY'}

a',,'t,F-\

28.^{Grant of Permit'-(1)The ChielWildLifeWardenmay'on} application,^{grant to any persona permit to enter or residein} a sanctuary^{for all or anl of the iollowing purposes' namely:-} (a) investigation^{or studyof rvildIife and purposes} ancillary^{or incidental theretol}

(b) Photographyl

(d) tourismi

(e1 transaction^{of lawful businessrvith anyperson} residing^{in thesanctuary'}

¶66

(2) A^{permit to entero' t""'U" in a sanctuaryshall be issued} ",o.i""..suchconditionsandonpaymentofsuchfeeasmay be Prescribed^'

¶67

The^{aforesaidstatutory provisions of law empower thc} respondents/^{State to grant permit for the purpose of tourists} and^{underSection 2B(2\of the Acl' permissionis granted to the} residents^{of Hyderabad to enter the Wildlifesanctuary'The} KBR^{Park is admittedl'v one of the largest lung space available} in the^{townshipof Hyderabad and the same is being maintained} by the^{ForestDepartment'The Forest Department is taking ali} measures in respect^{of protection' security and maintenance of} the KBR^{Park, which involveheavy exPenditurePrivate} securiry-^{guards arebeingengaged,Basic CamP/StrikeForce} has been^{deployed, stepsare being taken to protect floraand} faunaoftheNationalPark,certainconstructionswhichare required^{for maintainingthe Water Harvest Structures have also} rbeenraised,andrescuinganimalslikepeacocks,snakesg;rd

¶68

¶69

¶70

other animals^{also takes place, whichalso involve expenditure'} OutsidetheKBRPark,aMuseumhasalsobeendeveloped'The KBR Park also^{provides facility for natior-ralcampsfor school} children and^{gther activities,which also require heavy} expencliture.^{CCTV camerashave been installed over the} walking track^{and Door Framed Metal Detectors and Hand Held} Metal Detectors^{are also in placeMeaning thereby'the fund so} generated is being^{utilized to maintain the Park' which is a} Wildlife Sanctuary/^{National Park and for those persons who do} not want to^{pay, there is a walking trackoutsidethe Parkof the} same length^{and breadth encirclingthe entire Park' Itis} nobody's case^{that onlythose persons, who pay the fee are} being permitted^{to walk. The Park is also availablefor a} common man.^{However, in case he wants to go insidethe Park'} he has to^{pay the requisitefee and if he does not want to go} inside the Park,^{there is a walking track for him also'}

¶71

¶72

ln the considered^{opinion of this Court' the enhanced} entranceleeiscertainlyreasonableandtheRulespermitfor charging for^{such fee. Therefore, this Court does not find} reason to^{interferewirh the actionof the respondents/ State'} Resultantly,^{thcpublic interest litigationstands}

dismissed '

()

Pendingmisce]laneousapplications,ifany,shallstand

¶78

closed.^There sha11 be^{no order as to costs'}

¶79

//TRUE^COPY'