M.K. Ranjitsinh and Others vs. Union of India and Others

CASE: M.K. Ranjitsinh and Others vs. Union of India and Others

 

Facts of the Case

In the case of M.K. Ranjitsinh and Others vs. Union of India and Others, Petition for the issuance of Writ was filed for safeguarding the endangered Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican. These birds are on the verge of extinction and are primarily found in some specific areas of Gujarat and Rajasthan. The petitioners argued that overhead power cables are a significant threat to the Great Indian Bustard, causing numerous death of birds annually due to collisions. According to a report, around 100,000 birds die annually from collisions with power lines, it is essential to reduce the death rate to prevent the Great Indian Bustard from extinction. Specifically, between 2017 and 2020, six Great Indian Bustards died in the Thar region due to high-tension power lines. The Ministry of Power acknowledged that the birds' poor frontal vision makes them susceptible to collisions and electrocution. The petitioners requested measures like predator-proof fencing, controlled grazing, and a halt to the installation of overhead power lines, windmills, and solar infrastructure in critical habitats identified by the Wildlife Institute of India.

 

Contentions made in the case

The respondents argued that high-voltage power lines did not cause bird deaths by electrocution but by collision. They opposed burying these lines underground, citing high costs, longer repair times, unavailability of suitable cables, and increased joint issues. Petitioners provided examples where underground lines were used to protect birds, showing it's feasible. However, respondents countered that this solution isn't universally applicable due to varying terrain and cable distances. The court agreed, suggesting bird divertors and selective undergrounding instead. They emphasized protecting bird eggs, transferring them to breeding centers, and habitat restoration with predator-proof fencing.

Court’s Order

The court ruled that immediate actions must be taken to conserve dwindling species. This includes installing diverters and studying the feasibility of placing transmission lines underground before they are installed. If underground installation isn't feasible, diverters must be a mandatory contract condition. The costs for these measures should be covered by respondents 5 to 11, with respondents 1 to 4 assisting. The court recommended raising funds by utilizing corporate social responsibility provisions under section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013, and by ensuring company directors follow section 166 (2), which obligates them to act in the best interest of the community and environment. Furthermore, it suggested using funds from the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016, to address wildlife threats. Notably, the petitioners pointed out that Rs. 47,436 crores out of Rs. 54,685 crores have been allocated to a fund by the state of Rajasthan.

Comment

This case highlights the urgent need for measures to protect endangered species. The court's decision to mandate the installation of diverters and consider underground transmission lines before installing overhead lines reflects a proactive approach to wildlife conservation. Furthermore, the ruling highlights the crucial role of corporate social responsibility and the application of compensatory afforestation funds to aid in these conservation efforts. This case stresses the need for joint efforts among different parties to safeguard our environment and wildlife.