T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad versus Union of India

Pays/Territoire: Inde
Type de cour: Nationale - cour supérieure
Date: Sep 26, 2005
Source: UNEP, InforMEA

Nom du tribunal: Supreme Court of India
Juge: Sabharwal, Y., K.
Arijit Pasayat
Kapadia, S., H.
Numéro de référence: WP 202/1995
Langue: Anglais
Sujet: Forêts, Environnement gén.
Mot clé: Mesures de protection des forêts Préservation de l'écosystème Redevances d'exploitation forestière/droits Gestion/conservation Droits/redevances relatives à l'environnement Allocation des coûts environnementaux Gestion forestière/conservation des forêts Responsabilité/indemnisation

Résumé: In the present case, the Supreme Court considered the following main issue: When forest land is used for non-forest purposes, what measures are required to be taken to compensate for loss of forest land and to compensate effect on the ecology? In this context, the Court examined the following questions: Before diversion of forest land for non- forest purposes and consequential loss of benefits accruing from the forests, should not the user agency of such land be required to compensate for the diversion? If so, should not the user Agency be required to make payment of Net Present Value (NPV) of such diverted land in order to utilize the amounts received for getting back the benefits which were lost by such diversion? What guidelines should be issued for determination of NPV? Should guidelines apply uniformly to all? How to calculate NPV? Should some projects be exempted from payment of NPV? The court analyzed these aspects referring to the legal framework for the protection of the environment in India, including the Constitution of India, the Forest (Conservation) Act, the Environment (Protection) Act, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and the Wild Life (Protection) Act and it examined already existing regulations for the recovery of NPV. It considered the question of guiding principles to be laid down for determining the NPV, its concept and how it was to be calculated. It examined the matter of the legal and jurisdictional basis to levy NPV. It also applied various techniques for the economic valuation of the different functions of the forests. Furthermore, it dealt with the contention that the State had no objection to the levy of NPV but the amount so received should come to the State. The Court held that the natural resources were not ownership of any one State or individual, public at large was its beneficiary and, therefore, the contention that the amount of NPV should be made over to the State Government could not be accepted. It emphasized that there was a need to tackle the environmental degradation in a holistic manner in order to ensure both economic and environmental sustainability. Forests played an important role in environmental and economic sustainability. It took note of the forests being consistently and seriously undervalued in economic and social terms. The economic value of the eco-system services of the forests was vast though it was extremely difficult to quantify. It also noted that generally much of the land-use decision that presently drove forest change took relatively little account of these values. Finally, the Court turned to the submission that Government hospitals, dispensaries, non- commercial government ventures like schools, rain water harvesting tanks, sever lines, village roads etc. were projects meant for public welfare and had no adverse impact on environment as such and, therefore, these cases deserved to be granted exemption from the NPV. The Court was of the view that revenue earning projects did not deserve similar treatment as non-revenue earning public welfare projects. In conclusion, the Court held that except for government projects like hospitals, dispensaries and schools, all other projects were be required to pay NPV. The amounts were required to be used for achieving ecological plans and for protecting the environment and for the regeneration of forest and maintenance of ecological balance and eco-systems. The payment of NPV was for protection of environment and not in relation to any propriety rights. Finally, the Court ordered the establishment of a committee of experts in order to, inter alia, identify and define parameters (scientific, bio-metric and social) on the basis of which each of the categories of values of forest land should be estimated and to formulate a practical methodology applicable to different bio-geographical zones of India for estimation of the values in monetary terms.
Texte intégral: printable.asp