AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioners claim that they are fathers of deceased persons, who died during occurrence when inhabitants of villages Bankoot, Bararipora, Kralpora, Mantrigam, Boniyar, Wanagam, Mangnipora, Bandipora, etcetera of Tehsil Bandipora, badly suffered in the year 1997-1998, due to attacks to their kith and kin by a maneater leopard. Petitioners approached respondents personally as well as through representations for payment of adequate relief in their favour after the death of their kins due to attack by maneater leopard. It is contended that respondent no.4 vide letter dated 14th November 2006 (Annexure B to writ petition) admitted that human damage had been caused by wild animals in Baramulla and Bandipora and recommended cases of petitioners for payment of compensation. List of persons, including petitioners, who received casualties due to wild animals attack in various areas of District was also sent vide letter dated 24th December 2009 (Annexure C to writ petition). Thereafter they again represented before respondents. A writ petition, being OWP no.90/2011, titled Farooq Ahmad Sofi and others v. State and others, was filed petitioners, which was disposed of vide order dated 23rd May 2014 (Annexure E to writ petition) directing respondents to consider petitioners' claim within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the said order. In terms of communication dated 16th July 2014 (Annexure F to writ petition) respondents held petitioners not entitled to compensation/ex gratia. Petitioners are aggrieved of said order contained in communication dated 16th July 2014 and seek its quashment, by way of writ of certiorari. Petitioners also seek quashment of condition no.6 of Government Order no.244-FST of 2014 dated 23rd July 2014 (Annexure G to writ petition) with a direction to respondents to pay compensation to petitioners.
Respondents 1 to 4, in opposition to writ petition on hand, insist in their Reply that incident that happened due to man-animal conflict was communicated to higher ups, but there was no such provision of compensation in Wildlife Protection Act, who suffered loss of life or any injury before 2006. It is stated that in compliance to order dated 23rd May 2011, passed by this Court in writ petition, being OWP no.90/2011, respondents considered and rejected case of petitioners as same does not fall within ambit of provisions of Wildlife Protection Act. Respondents maintain that since case of petitioners is of the year 2006, their case does not fall within the ambit of Government Order no.244-FST of 2014 dated 23rd July 2014 as in terms thereof ex gratia relief has been enhanced from 2014 in favour of victims of man-animal conflict.
Given the case set up and submissions made by learned counsel for parties, it would be appropriate to go through Government Order no.244-FST of 2014 dated 23rd July 2014 and in this regard reproduce it hereinafter:
"Government of Jammu & Kashmir
Department of Forest, Ecology & Environment
Civil Secretariat, Srinagar
Subject: Payment of ex-gratia relief for deaths/injuries caused to the human life on account of man-animal conflict cases.
Ref: Minutes of the 3rd meeting of State Board for Wildlife held at Srinagar on 17.09.2013 issued vide endorsement No.WLP/SBWL/II/ 2013 / 397-70 dated 09.11.2013.
Government Order No. 244-FST of 2014
Dated: 23.07.2014
Sanction is hereby accorded to the ex-gratia relief on account of death/injury caused to human life by wild animals during man-animal conflicts with the following descriptions:
S.No.
Category of cases
Rate of ex-gratia relief
A
Death
Rs. 3,00,000/-
Permanent disability (handicapness of 40% or more)
Rs. 3,00,000/-
B
Grievous Injury
(an injury which may not result in permanent disability but requires hospitalization for more than 48 hours for recovering from the injury)
Rs. 1,00,000/-
C
Minor Injury
(an injury which is of First Aid nature or which does not require hospitalization for duration more than 48 hours)
Cost of treatment up to Rs.15,000/-
The grant of compensation as referred above shall be subject to the following conditions:
i. Production of postmortem report in case of death; certificate in case of grievous injury, partial and permanent disability and prescription slip as well as verification of actual cost of medical treatment in case of simple injury from the concerned Block Medical Officer.
ii. Copy of First Information Report (FIR) of incident from Police Department.
iii. Photographs of killed/injured person(s) duly attested by the Police/Medical Officers or Wildlife Warden as the case may be.
iv. The scrutiny of compensation cases duly recommended by the Regional Wildlife Wardens concerned shall be conducted by the committee under the chairmanship of Chief Conservator of Forests (Eco-tourism) comprising of following members:
It is pertinent to mention here that "wild animals" as is evident from the provisions of Section 38 of J&K Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1978, are Government property and in this regard, it would be apt to reproduce Section 38 (1) hereinafter:
"38. Wild animals etc. to be Government property. - (1) Every -
(a) Wild animal other than vermin, which is hunted under section 10 or section 29 or sub-section (6) of section 35 or kept or bred in captivity or hunted in contravention of any provision of this Act or any rule or order made thereunder or found dead, or killed by mistake; and
(b) animal article, trophy or uncured trophy or meat derived from any wild animal referred to in clause (a) in respect of which any offence against this Act or any rule or order made thereunder has been committed.
(c) ivory and an article made from such ivory in respect of which an offence against this Act or any rule or order made thereunder has been committed;
(d) timber or forest produce in respect of which an offence has been committed in a Conservation Reserve or a Sanctuary or a National Park declared by the Government; and
(e) vehicle, vessel, weapon, trap or tool that has been used from committing an offence and has been seized under the provisions of this Act; and shall be the property of the Government, and where such animal is hunted in a sanctuary or National Park, declared by the Government, such animal or any animal article, trophy, uncured trophy or meat derived from such animal, or any vehicle, vessel, weapon, trap or tool used in such hunting shall be the property of the Government."
Although, provision declares that wild animals are Government property, in the context of their protection from being hunted, it would be apt to say that the wild animals should be treated as Government property for all purposes. Thus, if a wild animal causes loss to an agriculturist or a citizen, it would be the responsibility of the appropriate Government to make good the loss. Surely, it would be open to a citizen to claim compensation for the loss caused by any wild animal, whether specifically referred to in any provision, Government Order, Scheme or not. In fact, I find from the compensation policy framed by the Government that it provides for grant of compensation and such benefit cannot be restricted to those who would be affected in man-animal conflict after 2014 and those who have prior thereto approached the government or concerned authorities for grant of compensation in view of man-animal conflict deaths/injuries, are not entitled to any relief. Respondents, in the present case, need to consider and have a sympathy as well towards the case of petitioners. We are a welfare State and it is expected of respondents to come forward and consider the case of petitioners sympathetically. On these lines the writ petition on hand is disposed of and it is expected that respondents shall consider petitioners' case for compensation as expeditiously as possible.
Disposed of.