# T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

- **Citation:** [2012] 1 S.C.R. 923
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2012-02-13
- **Bench:** K.S. Radhakrishnan, Chandramauli Kr. Prasad
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/t-n-godavarman-thirumalpad-v-union-of-india-others-28105
- **Pages:** 33

## Headnote

C
WILD LIFE (PROTECTION) ACT, 1972:
Object of its enactment - Discussed.
s.2(27) - Whether sandalwood (Santa/um album Linn) D
stated to be an endangered species, be declared as a
"specified plant" within the meaning of s.2(27), and be
included in the Schedule VI of the Act - Held: Indian
sandalwood (Santa/um album Linn) is not included in the
species listed in Appendix-II of CITES, however red E
sandalwood (Pterocarpus Santalinus) is seen included in
Appendix-I/ - At the ~ame time International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has included Santa/um album
Linn in its Red List of threatened species as "vulnerable" and
red sandalwood (Pterocarpus Santalinus) in the Red List as F
"endangered" - Red sandalwood is a species of Pterocarpus
native of India found nowhere in the world and possesses
medicinal properties - Following the ecocentric principle, the
Central Government is directed to take appropriate steps to
include Red Sanders in Schedule-VI of the Act - Sandalwood G
as sucn finds no place in CITES but it is included in the Red
List of /UCN as "vulnerable" and, therefore, calls for serious
attention by the Central Government, considering the fact that
all the sandalwood growing States have stated that it faces
923
H
924
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A
extinction - Central Government is, therefore, directed to
examine the issue at length in consultation with NBWL and
take a decision as to whether Sandalwood is to be notified as
a specific plant and be included in Schedule VI of the Act -
Central Government is also directed to formulate a policy for
B
conservation of sandalwood including provisions for financial
reserves for such conservation and scientific research for
sustainable use of biological diversity in sandalwood - Central
Government should also formulate rules and regulations for
effective monitoring, control and regulation of sandalwood
C industries - States are directed to immediately close down all
un-licensed sandalwood oil factories, if functioning and take
effective measures for proper supervision and control of the
existing licensed sandalwood oil factories in States -
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 51 A(g), 48A -
0
Environmental Protection Act, 1986.
Sandalwood - Legislative measures taken by some of
the States - Discussed Kera/a Forest (Amendment) Act, 2010
- ss.47A, 47C - Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 - s.40G - Tamil
Nadu Sandalwood Possession Rules, 1970 - Tamil Nadu
E
Sandalwood Transit Rules, 1967 - Karnataka Forest Act, 1963
- s.83 - A.P. Forest Act, 1967 - A.P. Sandalwood Possession
Rules, 1969 - A. P. Sandalwood and Red Sanderswood Transit
Rules, 1969 - Felling of Trees (Regulation) Act, 1964 -
Bombay Forest Rules 1942 - Madhya Pradesh Revenue
F
Code - Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 1973 (CITES), the
Convention of Biological Diversity 1992 (CBD).
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY ACT, 2002:
G
Object of its enactment - Discussed.
DOCTRINES/PRINCIPLES:
Public trust doctrine - Held: Is meant to ensure that all
H humans have equitable access to natural resources treating
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
925
INDIA & ORS.
all natural resources as properly and not life - The principle A
also has its roots in anthropocentric principle - Precautionary
principle and polluter-pays principles are also based on
anthropocentric principle since they also depend on harm to
humans as a pre-requisite for invoking those principles - The
principle of sustainable development and inter-generational B
equity too pre-supposes the higher needs of humans and Jays
down that exploitation of natural resources must be equitably
distributed between the present and future generations.
Anthropocentrism vis-a-vis ecocentric approach - Held: C
Anthropocentrism considers humans to be the most imporlant
factor and value in the universe and states that humans have
greater intrinsic value than other species - Resultantly, any
species that are of potential use to humans can b

## Text

_Characters 0–39,403 of 64,634. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39403 for what follows._

[2012] 1 S.C.R. 923
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD
A
v.
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
I. A. Nos. 1287, 1570-1571, 1624-1625, 1978, 2395, 27952796
~
B
(Writ Petition (C) No. 202 of 1995)
FEBRUARY 13, 2012
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND CHANDRAMAULI KR.
PRASAD, JJ.]
C
WILD LIFE (PROTECTION) ACT, 1972:
Object of its enactment - Discussed.
s.2(27) - Whether sandalwood (Santa/um album Linn) D
stated to be an endangered species, be declared as a
"specified plant" within the meaning of s.2(27), and be
included in the Schedule VI of the Act - Held: Indian
sandalwood (Santa/um album Linn) is not included in the
species listed in Appendix-II of CITES, however red E
sandalwood (Pterocarpus Santalinus) is seen included in
Appendix-I/ - At the ~ame time International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has included Santa/um album
Linn in its Red List of threatened species as "vulnerable" and
red sandalwood (Pterocarpus Santalinus) in the Red List as F
"endangered" - Red sandalwood is a species of Pterocarpus
native of India found nowhere in the world and possesses
medicinal properties - Following the ecocentric principle, the
Central Government is directed to take appropriate steps to
include Red Sanders in Schedule-VI of the Act - Sandalwood G
as sucn finds no place in CITES but it is included in the Red
List of /UCN as "vulnerable" and, therefore, calls for serious
attention by the Central Government, considering the fact that
all the sandalwood growing States have stated that it faces
923
H
924
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A
extinction - Central Government is, therefore, directed to
examine the issue at length in consultation with NBWL and
take a decision as to whether Sandalwood is to be notified as
a specific plant and be included in Schedule VI of the Act -
Central Government is also directed to formulate a policy for
B
conservation of sandalwood including provisions for financial
reserves for such conservation and scientific research for
sustainable use of biological diversity in sandalwood - Central
Government should also formulate rules and regulations for
effective monitoring, control and regulation of sandalwood
C industries - States are directed to immediately close down all
un-licensed sandalwood oil factories, if functioning and take
effective measures for proper supervision and control of the
existing licensed sandalwood oil factories in States -
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 51 A(g), 48A -
0
Environmental Protection Act, 1986.
Sandalwood - Legislative measures taken by some of
the States - Discussed Kera/a Forest (Amendment) Act, 2010
- ss.47A, 47C - Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 - s.40G - Tamil
Nadu Sandalwood Possession Rules, 1970 - Tamil Nadu
E
Sandalwood Transit Rules, 1967 - Karnataka Forest Act, 1963
- s.83 - A.P. Forest Act, 1967 - A.P. Sandalwood Possession
Rules, 1969 - A. P. Sandalwood and Red Sanderswood Transit
Rules, 1969 - Felling of Trees (Regulation) Act, 1964 -
Bombay Forest Rules 1942 - Madhya Pradesh Revenue
F
Code - Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 1973 (CITES), the
Convention of Biological Diversity 1992 (CBD).
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY ACT, 2002:
G
Object of its enactment - Discussed.
DOCTRINES/PRINCIPLES:
Public trust doctrine - Held: Is meant to ensure that all
H humans have equitable access to natural resources treating
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
925
INDIA & ORS.
all natural resources as properly and not life - The principle A
also has its roots in anthropocentric principle - Precautionary
principle and polluter-pays principles are also based on
anthropocentric principle since they also depend on harm to
humans as a pre-requisite for invoking those principles - The
principle of sustainable development and inter-generational B
equity too pre-supposes the higher needs of humans and Jays
down that exploitation of natural resources must be equitably
distributed between the present and future generations.
Anthropocentrism vis-a-vis ecocentric approach - Held: C
Anthropocentrism considers humans to be the most imporlant
factor and value in the universe and states that humans have
greater intrinsic value than other species - Resultantly, any
species that are of potential use to humans can be a reserve
to be exploited which leads to the point of extinction of
biological reserves - Furlher, that principle highlights human D
obligations towards environment arising out of instrumental,
educational, scientific, cultural, recreational and aesthetic
values that forests has to offer to humans - Under this
approach, environment is only protected as a consequence
of and to the extent needed to protect human well being - On
E
the other hand, ecocentric approach to environment stress the
moral imperatives to respect intrinsic value, inter dependence
and integrity of all forms of life - Ecocentrism supporls the
protection of all life forms, not just those which are of value to
humans or their needs and underlines the fact that humans F
are just one among the various life forms on earlh - The
intrinsic value of the environment also finds a place in various
international conventions like, Convention for Conservation
of Antarctic Living Res0urces 1980, the Protocol to Antarctic
Treaty on Environmental Protection 1998, the Bern G
Convention on Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural
Habitats 1982, CITES, and CBD.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1986:
H
926
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A
Object of its enactment - Discussed.
INTERNATIONAL TREATIES:
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
B Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) - Object of - Held: CBD
mandates the contracting parties to develop and maintain
necessary legislation for protection and regulation of
threatened species and also regulate trade therein - CITES
classifies species into different appendices in the order of their
C endangerment, and prescribes different modes of regulation
in that regard - Parties to the CITES are entitled to take (a)
stricter domestic measures regarding conditions of trade,
taking possession or transport of specimens of species
included in Appendix-/, II and Ill, or the complete prohibition
D thereof or; (b) domestic measures restricting or prohibiting
trade, taking possession or transport of species not included
in Appendix I, II or Ill - Species listed in Appendix-/1 shall
include all species which although not necessarily now
threatened with extinction may become so unless trade in
E specimens of such species is subject to strict regulation in
order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival and
other species which must be subject to regulation in order that
trade in specimens of certain species referred to earlier may
be brought under effective control - Environmental Protection
F
Act, 1986 - Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
G
H
Incorporation of provisions of treaties in domestic Jaw -
Held: The provisions of the Treaties/Conventions which are
not contrary to Municipal laws would be deemed to have been
incorporated in the domestic Jaw.
The question which arose for consideration in the
instant applications was whether sandalwood (Santalum
album Linn) stated to be an endangered species, be
declared as a "specified plant" within the meaning of
'
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
927
INDIA & ORS.
Section 2(27), and be included in the Schedule VI of the
A
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
Disposing of the applications, the Court
HELD: 1. Sandalwood is an evergreen tree which
generally grows in the dry, deciduous forests of the
8
Deccan Plateau. Sandalwood is also mentioned in one of
the oldest epics, the Ramayana. Descriptions are also
made by Kalidasa of its use in his literary works as well.
In short, it is part of Indian culture and heritage and its
fragrance has spread not only in India but also abroad
C
and its rich oil content led to its large scale exploitation
as well. Exploitation of this rare endangered species went
on unabatedly, especially in the southern States of India
and on intervention of this Court, the State of Kerala has
closed down 24 unlicensed sandalwood· oil factories.
D
Similar steps were being taken by other states as well.
[Para 11] [944-E·F]
2. SOME OF THE LEGISLATIVE MEASURES TAKEN
BY SOME OF THE STATES ARE AS UNDER:
E
2.1. State of Kerala:
In State of Kerala, best quality sandalwood trees are
grown in the forest of Marayoor, spread over 93 Sq.Km
which generate the best quality sandalwood oil in the
F
world. Recently, the Kerala Forest (Amendment) Act, 2010
introduced a new chapter, Chapter 6A entitled
"Provisions relating to sandalwood" which regulates
cutting and possession of sandalwood. Section 47A
provides that no individual shall cut, uproot, remove or G
sell any sandalwood tree without previous permission in
writing from the forest officer. There is also absolute
prohibition on transport and possession of sandalwood
or sandalwood oil in excess of one Kilogram or 100 ml
respectively without a license from the forest officer
H
..
928
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A under Section 47C of the Act. Under Section 47C(3) only
the government or the public sector undertakings (PSU)
owned by the government shall manufacture or distil,
refine or sell sandalwood oil. Section 47F imposes
restrictions on purchase and sale of sandalwood from
B any person other than government or authorised officer.
Provision is also there for seizure of sandalwood and its
oil under Section 47H and penalty for offences can be
imposed. Act also provides for imprisonment for three
years, extendable upto seven years and fine not less than
c Rs.10,000/- extendable upto Rs.25,000/-. [Para 12] [945-H;
945-A-D]
2.2. State of Tamil Nadu
The Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 - Section 40G of the
D Act provides that teak, blackwood, ebony, sandalwood
and also ivory and teeth of elephants, either grown or
found on government land or private property are
royalties and no trade shall be carried on in them unless
they have been duly obtained from the government.
.E Section 40G(2) places restrictions on felling of trees by
any person without the permission of the Chief
Conservator of Forest or any other person authorised by
him. The State of Tamil Nadu has also enacted the Tamil
Nadu Sandalwood Possession Rules, 1970 and also
F Tamil Nadu Sandalwood Transit Rules, 1967, and the Act
also provides for imposing penalties and imprisonment.
[para 13] [945-E-H]
2.3. State of Karnataka
G
The Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and the Rules made
thereunder have removed the restrictions on growing
sandalwood trees in private lands. Section 83 of the Act
provides that where a person is an owner of sandalwood
trees before the commencement of 2001 Amendment
H Act, he shall not fell or sell such sandalwood tree or
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
929
INDIA & ORS.
convert or dress sandalwood obtained from such tree or A
possess or store or transport or sell the sandalwood
except in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The
Act also provides for imposition of penalty and
imprisonment. [para 14] [946-A-C]
2.4. State of Andhra Pradesh
B
The A.P. Forest Act, 1967, A.P. Sandalwood
Possession Rules, 1969, A.P. Sandalwood and Red
Sanderswood Transit Rules, 1969 generally deal with the
possession, control and transit of sandalwood and Red
C
Sanders etc., but there is no restriction as such on the
felling of sandalwood trees. The Act also provides for
punishment for contravention of the provisions of the Act
or the rules made thereunder. [para 15] [946-D]
2.5. State of Maharashtra has also enacted the Felling
of Trees (Regulation) Act, 1964, The Bombay Forest Rules
1942, which deal with sandalwood as well.
D
2.6. State of Madhya Pradesh has also enacted
Madhya Pradesh Revenue Code. States like Gujarat,
E
Orissa have framed special provisions for dealing with
sandalwood. [para 16] [946-F]
3. Article 48A of the Constitution introduced by the
Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act 1976 states that the
F
State shall endeavour to protect and improve the
environment and safeguard the forest and wild life of the
country. Article 51 A(g) states that it shall be the duty of
every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural
environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife G
and to have compassion for living creatures. By the same
constitutional amendment Entry 17A "forest" and 17B
"protection of wild animals and birds" were included in
List Ill - Concurrent List so that the Parliament as well as
the States can enact laws to give effect to the Directive
H
930
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A Principles of State Policy as well as various international
obligations. Earlier, by virtue of Entry 20 of the State List
VII Schedule to the Constitution, namely protection of wild
animals and birds, only the State had the power to
legislate and Parliament had no power to make law in this
B regard applicable to the State unless the legislatures of
two or more states passed a resolution in pursuance of
Article 252 of the Constitution empowering the Parliament
to pass necessary legislations on the subject. However,
by virtue of (42nd Amendment) Act 1976 of the
c Constitution, the Parliament has got the power to legislate
for the whole country. Consequently, the Wildlife
(Protection Act) 1972 was enacted by the Parliament to
provide for the protection to wild animals, birds and
plants and for matters connected therewith or ancillary
0 or incidental thereto with a view to ensure the ecological
and environmental security of the country. The Act was
later amended and Chapter-lllA was inserted by Act 44 of
1991 enacting provisions for the protection of "specified
plants". [para 17] [946-G-H; 947-A-E]
E
4. Biological Diversity Act, 2002 was also enacted by
the Parliament with the object of conserving biological
diversity, sustainable use of its components and for fair
and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of
utilization of genetic resources. Biological diversity
F includes all the organisms found on our planet viz., the
plants, animals and micro organisms. Environmental
Protection Act, 1986 enacted by the Parliament empowers
the Central Government under Section 3 to take such
measures for the purpose of protecting and improving
G the quality of environment. The examination of all these
legislations in the light of the constitutional provisions
and various international conventions like Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora 1973 (CITES), the Convention of Biological
H Diversity 1992 (CBD) evidently shows that there is a shift
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
931
INDIA & ORS.
from environmental rights to ecological rights, though
A
gradual but substantial. Earlier, the Rio Declaration on
Earth Summit asserted the claim "human beings are the
centre of concern". U.N. Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED-1992), was also based on
anthropocentric ethics, same was the situation in respect
B
of many such international conventions, that followed.
[para 18] [947-F-H; 948-A-B]
5. The public trust doctrine developed in *M.C. Mehta
vs. Kamalnath is also meant to ensure that all humans
C
have equitable access to natural resources treating all
natural resources as property and not life. That principle
also has its roots in anthropocentric principle.
Precautionary principle and polluter-pays principles in
••vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs. Union of India are
also based on anthropocentric principle since they also
D
depend on harm to humans as a pre-requisite for
invoking those principles. The principle of sustainable
development and inter-generational equity too presupposes the higher needs of humans and lays down
that exploitation of natural resources must be equitably
E
distributed between the present and future generations.
Environmental ethics behind those principles were
human need and exploitation, but such principles have
no role to play while deciding the fate of an endangered
species or the need to protect the same irrespective of
F
its instrumental value. [para 19) [948-C-F]
*M.C. Mehta v. Kama/nath 1997 (1) SCC 388: 1996 (10)
Suppl. SCR 12; **Ve/lore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union
of India and others 1996 (5) SCC 647 : 1996 (5) Suppl. SCR
G
241 - relied on.
•
6. Anthropocentrism considers humans to be the
most important factor and value in the universe and
states that humans have greater intrinsic value than other
species. Resultantly, any species that are of potential use
H
932
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(2012] 1 S.C.R.
A to humans can be a reserve to be exploited which leads
to the point of extinction of biological reserves. Further,
that principle highlights human obligations towards
environment arising out of instrumental, educational,
scientific, cultural, recreational and aesthetic values that
B forests has to offer to humans. Under this approach,
environment is only protected as a consequence of and
to the extent needed to protect human well being. On the
other hand ecocentric approach to environment stress
the moral imperatives to respect intrinsic value, inter
c dependence and integrity of all forms of life. Ecocentrism
supports the protection of all life forms, not just those
which are of value to humans or their needs and
underlines the fact that humans are just one among the
various life forms on earth. This principle had its roots in
0 India, much before it was thought of in the Western world.
Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi has also taught the
same principle and all those concepts find their place in
Article 51A(g) as well. The intrinsic value of the
environment also finds a place in various international
conventions like, Convention for Conservation of
E Antarctic Living Resources 1980, the Protocol to Antarctic
Treaty on Environmental Protection 1998, the Bern
Convention on Conservation of European Wildlife and
Natural Habitats 1982, CITES, and CBD etc. India is a
signatory to CBD, which also mandates the contracting
F parties to develop and maintain necessary legislation for
protection and regulation of threatened species and also
regulate trade therein. CITES in its preamble also
indicates that Fauna and Flora are irreplaceable part of
the natural environment of the earth and international
G cooperation is essential for the protection of certain
species against over exploitation and international trade.
CITES, to which India is a signatory, classifies species
into different appendices in the order of their
endangerment, and prescribes different modes of
H regulation in that regard. Parties to the CITES are also
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
933
INDIA & ORS.
entitled to take (a) stricter domestic measures regarding
A
conditions of trade, taking possession or transport of
specimens of species included in Appendix-I, II and Ill, or
the complete prohibition thereof or; (b) domestic
measures restricting or prohibiting trade, taking
possession or transport of species not included in
Appendix I, II or Ill. Species listed in Appendix - II shall
include all species which although not necessarily now
threatened with extinction may become so unless trade
B
in specimens of such species is subject to strict
regulation in order to avoid utilization incompatible with c
their survival and other species which must be subject
to regulation in order that trade in specimens of certain
species referred to earlier may be brought under effective
control. CITES and CBD highlight the principles:- The
State is bound to initiate measures to identify threatened
0
species. The State is obliged to initiate measures to
conserve and protect such threatened species. The State
is also required to formulate policies, legislation and
appropriate laws to curb those practices (including trade)
that result in extinction of species. The State is obliged
to undertake in-situ conservation of biological diversity
E
as it is not sufficient that a species is cultivated
elsewhere. It, ought to be protected in its natural habitat.
Indian sandalwood (Santalum album Linn) is not seen
included in the species listed in Appendix-II of CITES,
however red sandalwood (Pterocarpus Santalinus) is
seen included in Appendix-II. At the same time
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
which is an international organization dedicated to finding
pragmatic solutions of our most pressing environment
and development challenges has included Santalum
G
album Linn in its Red List of threatened species as
"vulnerable" and red sandalwood (Pterocarpus
Santalinus) in the Red List as "endangered". Therefore
both in CITES and in the IUCN Red List of threatened
species red sandalwood is described as "threatened with
F
H
934
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A extinction", "endangered". A tax on is critically
endangered when the available evidence indicates that
it meets with the criteria of extremely high risk of
extinction. It is Endangered when it meets with the criteria
of facing a very high risk of extinction. A taxon is
B vulnerable when it is considered to be facing a high risk
of extinction. Near threatened, means a taxon is likely to
qualify for a threatened category in the near future. [Paras
20-23) [948-G-H; 949-A-B; 950-B-D; 951-A-H; 952-A-E]
Environmental Ethics, Stanford Encyclopaedia of
C Philosophy 2002; Revised 2008 - referred to.
7. Red sandalwood is a species of Pterocarpus
native of India seen no where in the world. It is reported
that the same is found only in South India, especially in
D Cuddapah and Chittoor in the States of Tamil Nadu and
Andhra Pradesh border which is also known as Lal
Chandan IRakta Chandan in Hindi which is an endemic
and endangered species. Red sandalwood possesses
medicinal properties viz., an anticoagulant, improves local
E circulation and used on traumatic wounds, aberrations
and bruises. Since the trading is mostly in South India,
especially in Andhra Pradesh (AP) it is stated that A.P.
Forest Corporation has been appointed as an agent to
Govt. of A.P. for disposal of red sandalwood available with
F Forest Department. Red Sanders is an endemic and
endangered species found only in the State of A.P. A.P.
Government has banned the sale of Red Sanders even
by private parties, the wood is of huge demand in Japan,
China and Western world and is very costly and it is
G included in the negative list of plant species for export
purposes, implemented by the Directorate General of
Foreign Trade, Ministry of Commerce, placing restrictions
on international trade of Red Sanders. Large scale
smuggling of Red Sanders is however reported from
various quarters. In order to protect the species, a
H
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
935
INDIA & ORS.
proposal was made by the State of A.P. to Government A
of India for its inclusion in Schedule VI of the Act which
is justified. [Paras 24-25] [952-F-H; 953-A-C]
8. CITES as well as IUCN has acknowledged that Red
Sandalwood is an endangered species. It is settled law
8
that the provisions of the Treaties/Conventions which are
not contrary to Municipal laws, be deemed to have been
incorporated in the domestic law. Following the
ecocentric principle, the Central Government is directed
to take appropriate steps under Section 61 of tile Act to
C
include Red Sanders in Schedule-VI of the Act as
requested by the State of A.P., within a period of six
months from the date of this judgment. This direction is
given, since, it is reported that nowhere in the world, this
species is seen, except in India and it should be
safeguarded for posterity. Power is also vested with the
D
Central Government to delete from the Schedule if the
situation improves, and a species is later found to be not
endangered. [Para 26] [953-D-G]
Jolly George v. Bank of Cochin (1980) 2 SCC 360 : 1980
E
(2) SCR 913; Gramaphone Company of India v. Birendra
Baldev Pandey (1984) 2 SCC 534 : 1984 (2) SCR 664 -
relied on.
9. Sandalwood as such finds no place in CITES but
it is included in the Red List of IUCN as "vulnerable" and
F
hence call for serious attention by the Central
Government, considering the fact that all the sandalwood
growing states have stated that it faces extinction.
Section 61 of the Act empowers the Central Government
to add or delete any entry to or from any schedule if it is
G
known that it is expedient so to do. Section 5 deals with
the constitution of National Board for Wildlife (NBWL)
which is headed by the Prime Minister as Chairman.
Section SC deals with the functions of the NBWL which
states that it shall be the duty of the National Board to
H
936
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A promote the conservation and development of wildlife
and forests by such measures as it thinks fit. Section
5C(ii)(a) states that the measures may provide for
'.lromoting policies and advising Central Government and
State Governments on the ways and means of promoting
B wildlife conservation and effectively controlling poaching
and illegal trade of wildlife and its products and also for
reviving from time to time the progress in the field of
wildlife conservation in the country and suggesting
measures for improvement thereto. Various other powers
c have also been conferred on the National Board which
consists of experts in the field of environment. In such
circumstances rather than giving a positive direction to
include sandalwood in Schedule VI the Central
Government is directed to examine the issue at length in
0 consultation with NBWL and take a decision within a
period of six months as to whether it is to be notified as
a specific plant and be included in Schedule VI of the Act.
The Central Government is also directed to formulate a
policy for conservation of sandalwood including
provision for financial reserves for such conservation and
E scientific research for sustainable use of biological
diversity in sandalwood. Central Government would also
formulate rules and regulations under Section 3 and 5 of
Environmental Protection Act 1986 for effective
monitoring, control and regulation of sandalwood
F industries and factories and that it should also formulate
rules to ensure that no imported sandalwood is sold
Lmder the name of Indian sandalwood and adequate
labelling to this effect be mandated for products
manufactured from or of import of sandalwood. States
G are directed to immediately close down all un-licensed
sandalwood oil factories, if functioning and take effective
measures for proper supervision and control of the
existing licensed sandalwood oil factories in states. Time
has also come to think of a legislation similar to the
H Endangered Species Act, enacted in the United States
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
937
INDIA & ORS.
A
which protects both endangered species defined as
those "in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of their range" and "threatened
species", those likely to become endangered "within a
foreseeable time". The term species includes species
and sub-species of fish, wildlife and plants as well as
B
geographically distinct populations of vertebrate wildlife
even though the species as a whole may not be
endangered. [paras 27-29] [953-H; 954-A-H; 955-A-C]
Case Law Reference:
1996 (10) Suppl. SCR 12
relied on
Para 8
1996 (5) Suppl. SCR 241
relied on
Para 8
1980 (2) SCR 913
relied on
Para 26
1984 (2) SCR 664
relied on
Para 26
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: I. A. Nos. 1287, 15701571, 1624-1625, 1978, 2395, 2795-2796
IN
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 202 OF 1995
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
WITH
I.A. Nos. 2470-2471, 2472-2473, 2474-2475, 2476-2477,
2966-2967, in I.A. No.1287 in W.P.(C) 202 of 1995.
c
D
E
F
Mohan Jain, ASG, P.S. Narasimha, Rajiv Dutta,
Amarender Sharan, Basava Prabhu Patil, Gurukrishna Kumar,
G
MG, D.K. Thakur, Prabhat Kumar, Karthik Ashok, Sheethal
Menon, Namrata Bhatia, S.N. Terdal, Gaurav Agarwal, K.
Parmeswar, Haris Beeran, P.K. Manohar, Bina Madhavan, M.P.
Maharia, Sangeeta Kumar, Anitha Shenoy, T.N. Rao, Balraj
Dewan, Aruputham Aruna & Co., Parekh & Co., M.N. Krishma,
H
938
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A
N. Ganapathy, Ajay K. Dutta, S. Prasad, D. Bharathi Reddy,
A. Subhashini, Tarjil Singh, Manjil Singh (for Kamal Mohan
Gupta), Bishwajeet Dueby, Anushree Tripathi, Suresh A. Shroff
& Co., A. Deb Kumar, Mudrika Bansal, Sukhbir Kaur Bajwa,
Zafar Sadique, Anil Vyas, Balraj Dewan, Subramonium Prasad,
B Bipin Kalappa, Sumi! Goel, Rukhmini Bodbe (for Parekh &.
Co.), K.R. Sasiprabhu, N.P. Maharia, G. Prakash Sanjay R.
Hegde, T.V. George for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
C
K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. 1. We are in this case
concerned with the question whether sandalwood (Santa/um
album Linn) stated to be an endangered species, be declared
as a "specified plant" within the meaning of Section 2(27), and
be included in the Schedule VI of The Wild Life (Protection) Act,
D 1972 (for short the Act). On going through the various
international conventions, we thought ii appropriate to examine
the repeated requests made by the State of Andhra Pradesh
to the Central Govt. to notify Red Sanders (Pterocarpus
santalinus) as a 'specified plant' and be included in the
E Schedule VI of the Act.
2. A non-governmental organisation moved the Central
Empowered Committee (CEC) to initiate steps for closure of
all unlicensed sandalwood oil industries, particularly in the State
of Kerala. CEC after conducting a detailed enquiry and hearing
F the state officials, representatives of the sandalwood industries
and various other interested persons, submitted its report dated
24th February 2005 before this Court praying that all unlicensed
sandalwood oil industries be also brought within the purview
of this Court's order dated 30.12.2002 by which this Court had
G ordered the closure of all unlicensed saw mills, veneer and
plywood industries in the country. Various other directions were
also sought for. Report of the CEC was listed along with IA 1287
of 1995 which came up for hearing on 1.4.2005 and this Court
issued notices to the States of Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu,
H Andhra Pradesh, which are the major sandalwood growing
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
939
INDIA & ORS. (K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
states of the country. This Court then passed an order on
A
10.2.2006 directing closure of all the unlicensed sandalwood
oil extracting factories, operating in various parts of the country.
Consequently, 24 unlicensed sandalwood oil factories
functioning in the State of Kerala were closed down.
3. The State of Kerala and few other states submitted their
reply to the reports submitted by the CEC and pointed out that
no private sandalwood oil extracting units are now functioning
B
in most of the sandalwood growing states but only the state
owned public sector undertakings. The Karnataka Soaps and
C
Detergent Ltd., a Karnataka State owned undertaking also
submitted their views. MoEF also filed a detailed affidavit
before this Court stating that they have no objection in the
closure of all unlicensed sandalwood oil manufacturing factories
in the country.
D
4. Indian Sandalwood Association got themselves
impleaded and filed objections to the CEC Report. CEC later
submitted three other reports dated 8.1.2008, 2.9.2009,
15.11.2010. CEC in the reports took the stand that the
sandalwood oil industries could be permitted to function outside
E
the sandalwood growing states and that import of sandalwood
as such should not he banned. The Additional Principal Chief
Conservator of Forests, Karnataka also submitted before the
CEC that there are no matured sandalwood trees available in
the State of Karnataka and the State has not approved any
F
felling of sandalwood trees due to non-availability. State of
Tamil Nadu also stated before the CEC that no felling of
sandalwood tree was officially undertaken due to want of
matured trees. State of Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh have
also filed affidavits stating that whatever little sandalwood G
growth was there in those states needs to be protected and
that sandalwood species is under imminent threat. MoEF in its
affidavit dated 24th October, 2010 has stated as follows:
"The Ministry supports the contention that all illegal
sandalwood oil units should be closed down. As far as
H
940
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2012] 1 S.C.R.
A
closing of sandalwood units in non-sandalwood growing
States is concerned the Ministry has "No Objection" in
allowing the legal private entrepreneur from setting up
sandalwood oil units in non-sandalwood producing States
provided that only legally sourced sandalwood for which
g
Certificate of Origin has been obtained, is used and the
regulatory enforcement mechanisms, set up by the State
for detection, control and action against proceedings of
illegal units are well in place."
~
The CEC, however, in its report dated 2.9.2009
'"'
maintained the following stand:
·
D
E
F
G
"In the light of the facts highlighted above the CEC is unable
to agree with the contention of the Applicants that they
should be permitted to establish /continue the sandalwood
oil units in non-sandalwood producing States under
appropriate supervision and regulations and that the
imported sandalwood is a substitute for Indian
sandalwood. The CEC is of the considered view that if the
present state of affairs is allowed to continue, sandalwood,
so unique and a special gift· of nature to India would
become extinct in the not too distant future. The protection
of sandalwood forest is simply not possible without first
ensuring that the establishment I functioning of sandalwood
oil units are severely restricted I regulated in the country
particularly when the sandalwood has become an almost
extinct commodity. One is duty bound to protect in public
interest whatever sandalwood forests are left. This is one
instance where the public interest necessarily and
unhesitatingly has to take precedence over private interest.
However, sandalwood oil units, based exclusively on
imported sandalwood may be permitted in identified
locations subject to strict supervision and regulations by
the Forest Department.
5. MoEF however in its affidavit dated 24.3.2011 stated
H that in the light of the non-availability of sandalwood, it would
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
941
INDIA & ORS. [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
review its policy about permitting the export of sandalwood A
chips and oil, particularly, with reference to its adverse effect
on the production of sandalwood in the country and also would
examine the imposition of complete ban on sale/auction of
confiscated sandalwood in view of the alarming rate at which
sandalwood is disappearing and may become extinct in not too
B
distant future.
6. MoEF however in its latest affidavit dated 6.9.2011
expressed the apprehension that the inclusion of the
sandalwood species in Schedule VI in the Wild Life Protection C
Act, 1972 would alienate people from growing the species on
a large scale and hence it is of the view that an "All India
Sandalwood Legislation" would be an adequate solution, in the
event of which it was stated the species would be fully protected
within the country and at the same time trade could also be
regulated. Ministry has also expressed the view that D
sandalwood may be allotted to public sector units and that would
ensure that the artisans dealing with sandalwood would get raw
materials which would give them a greater impetus for taking
up their traditional work/skills and also give them an economic
boost as well as earn foreign revenue as sandalwood E
handicrafts have high demand for export.
7. The Sandalwood Oil Manufacturers Association
expressed the apprehension that the inclusion of the
sandalwood as a specified plant under the Act would not be
F
conducive and beneficial for the cultivation and preservation of
the trees. Reference was also made to the various provisions
of Chapter II IA of the Act and stated that the members of the
Association who have cultivation of sandalwood in the State of
Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and involved in the business of G
manufacturing products using sandalwood oil if covered by
Section 17 A(b} would be put to considerable difficulties. The
Association also maintained the stand that if Chapter lllA of the
Act is fully implemented by declaring the sandalwood as a
specified plant then it would adversely affect the interest of the
H
942
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(2012] 1 S.C.R.
A
cultivators of sandalwood and would lead to further extinction
of the species.
8. We have heard the learned amicus curiae, Mr. P.S.
Narasimha, Senior Counsel Mr. Rajiv Dutta, and other counsels
8
at length. Learned amicus curiae referred to the affidavits filed
by the MoEF and other state governments and submitted that
there is consensus among all major sandalwood growing states
and the Union of India that the export of sandalwood would be
of serious threat and may lead to the extinction of the species.
Few of the states have maintained the stand that no matured
C
sandalwood trees are available for felling which, according to
the amicus curiae leads to the inescapable conclusion that
Indian sandalwood is in fact endangered. Learned senior
counsel highlighted the necessity of the inclusion of sandalwood
in Schedule VI of the Act and submitted that the apprehension
D
expressed by the MoEF that it would discourage the cultivation
of sandalwood has no basis. Learned senior counsel
extensively referred to the provisions of Chapter lllA of Act and
the provisions of Bio Diversity Act, and submitted that when we
deal with the issue of an endangered species, the question to
E
be examined is not whether the species is of any instrumental
value to human beings, but its intrinsic worth. Learned senior
counsel extensively referred to the anthropocentric and
ecocentric approach and submitted that anthropocentric
approach would depend upon the instrumental value of life
F
forms to human beings while ecocentric approach stresses on
the intrinsic value of all life forms. Learned senior counsel
stressed that the bio-diversity law departs from the traditional
anthropocentric character of environmental law and that our
Constitution recognises ecocentric approach by obliging every
G citizen to have compassion for all living creatures, so also the
preamble to Act. Learned counsel also submitted that public
trust doctrine developed in M.C. Mehta v. Kama/nath 1997 (1)
sec 388 is based largely on anthropocentric principles and
the precautionary and polluter-pay principle affirmed by this
H
Court in Ve/lore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India and
T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMALPAD v. UNION OF
943
INDIA & ORS. [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
others 1996 (5) sec 647 are also rooted in anthropocentric
A
principle, since they too depend on harm to humans as a prerequisite for invocation of those principles.
9. Learned senior counsel also highlighted the principle of
sustainable development and inter-generational equity and
8
stated that they too pre-suppose the higher needs of human
beings and lays down that exploitation of natural resources must
be equitably distributed between the present and future
generation. Learned senior counsel also highlighted that the
above principle would be of no assistance when a Court is
C
called upon to decide as to when a species has become
endangered, or the need to protect irrespective of its
instrumental value.