New Delhi: "There is no judicial emergency provided under the Constitution to take over the functions of the Government," the Centre told the Supreme Court on Friday.

Additional Solicitor-General Vikas Singh made this assertion before a Bench comprising Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices Arijit Pasayat and S.H. Kapadia hearing the "forest matter".

In December last, the court stayed a notification issued by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests reconstituting the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) ignoring the names suggested by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC).

The court took exception to the tenor of the Ministry's affidavit which,doubting the credentials of the experts suggested by the CEC, said their knowledge should be tested in public at an oral examination in court.

The Ministry's stand was that wildlife experts and environmentalists Bittu Sahgal, Blinda Wright, Pranay Wagre, Shyam Chinani, P.K. Manohar and Claud Alwaris did not fulfil the requisite norms and hence were not considered.

Seeking to vacate the stay, Mr. Singh literally questioned the court's role in monitoring the "forest matter" for nearly a decade.

"It is not as if only the Supreme Court can protect the forest cover," he said. He reeled out figures to show that there was no depletion of forests, thanks to the enactment of the Forest Conservation Act and not because of the court's intervention. It should not pass orders on assumptions or be guided by other factors.

The Bench replied, "We have no assumptions, nor we are guided. Many things are said these days. We are not concerned about what they say. We will see to it at the appropriate time and say what action is to be taken."

Referring to the stay on the functioning of the FAC, Mr. Singh asked on what basis the non-official members appointed to the FAC could be removed once they fulfilled the requisite qualifications.

He wondered how a stay could be granted when there was no petition challenging their appointment. The court could not assume the role of the Government when a committee was validly constituted.

In the light of these submissions, the Bench modified the December 15, 2006 order. It said the FAC constituted by the Government could consider and pass orders on the fresh applications submitted for clearance and approval by public and private parties. The report of the FAC should be placed before the CEC for its decision; cases in which the FAC granted clearance prior to September 15, 2006 should also be placed before the CEC.

As for fresh cases of project clearance in forests and wildlife sanctuaries, the Bench said that since the court had granted relaxation in the rules, the FAC or the CEC need not pass any order. Cases in which the FAC granted clearance after September 15, 2006 and the CEC also gave its comments might be placed before the court in the third week of August.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail