By Arun Pratap Singh
Garhwal Post Bureau
Nainital, 7 Nov: The Uttarakhand High Court today heard a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning the growing incidents of man-wildlife conflict across the state and directed the petitioner to submit practical suggestions to help curb such incidents. A division bench comprising Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Subhash Upadhyay issued the direction while hearing the ongoing matter that has drawn attention to the increasing number of human casualties and livestock losses due to attacks by the wild animals.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that, despite earlier directions, the State Government had failed to produce a clear and comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs) to address the issue. The petitioners also submitted that since the PIL was first filed, more than a hundred villagers have fallen victim to wildlife attacks and that compensation from the Forest Department has not been paid to many affected families.
The government’s counsel, however, submitted that a compliance report had already been filed in accordance with previous directions of the Court. Taking note of this, the bench directed the petitioner, Anu Pant, to file through her lawyer a detailed response to the compliance report and to put forward concrete recommendations for effective measures that could help reduce such incidents in future.
Earlier, the Court had instructed the State Government to prepare the Rajaji Conservation Plan within two months and to study successful conservation models implemented in National Parks in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu to develop an improved Tiger Conservation Plan for Uttarakhand. The petitioner, however, argued that the compliance report now presented by the government remains inadequate and largely limited to procedural assertions rather than tangible field action.
It may be recalled that, in this case, the PIL has been filed by Dehradun resident Anu Pant, who stated that following an earlier hearing in November 2022, the High Court had directed the Principal Secretary (Forests) to constitute an expert committee to formulate measures to curb man-wildlife conflicts. The petitioner also pointed out that an affidavit submitted by the then Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Vinod Singhal, only mentioned administrative steps and paperwork without evidence of meaningful on-ground implementation.
The PIL has stressed that incidents of human-wildlife conflict have been on the rise in recent years, posing serious risks to rural populations living near forest areas. The petitioner further urged the Court to ensure strict adherence to its earlier orders and to direct the State Government to take prompt, effective, and transparent steps to bring such conflicts to a complete halt.
