Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: wild life protection act 1972 section 18 declaration of sanctuary Page 3 of about 7,149 results (0.368 seconds)

Bharthu and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2000)124PLR524

..... a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned notification dated july 29, 1988 issued under section 18 of the wild life (protection) act 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1972 act') and order of the collector, guhla, dated july 28, 1998 vide which he rejected the objections filed by the petitioners under ..... e., state of haryana, through its secretary to government, department of wild life preservation, issued notification dated july 29, 1988 under section 18 of the 1972 act declaring the area to be a sanctuary for the purpose of protecting, propagating and developing wild life and its environment. the total area acquired is 120 acres with boundaries ..... of the notification dated july 29, 1988 under section 18 of the 1972 act. what has been done by the said notification is to declare the reserved forest area as sanctuaries for the purpose of protecting, propagating and developing wild life and its environment. the petitioners have not challenged the notification by which the .....

M/S Natesan Agencies (Plantations) Vs. State Rep. By the Secretary to ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... a notification dated 06.03.1976, as issued by the government of tamil nadu, the land in question was proposed to be included in a wild life sanctuary under the wild life (protection) act, 19723 and several propositions for award of compensation were actively considered by the authorities concerned, who were also under the mandate of the high court ..... follows the directions of the government. since the notification and declaration was issued by the state government under section 18 of the unamended wild life protection act, it is the government and the government alone which can cancel or modify the notification by invoking the power under section 21 of the general clauses ..... on 14.07.1977, the district collector issued a proclamation under section 21 of the act of 1972 specifying the limits of the sanctuary and requiring any person having any right to file the claim in form no.8 under the wild life protection (tamil nadu) rules, 19754. the appellant would submit that the land in question was .....

R. Senniappan Vs. the Wildlife Warden. Indira Gandhi Wild Life Sanctua ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1999(3)CTC494

..... penning the cattle, namely anamalai mountain range is a sanctuary called indira gandhi wild life sanctuary. the parliament has enacted the wild life (protection) act, 1972 (act 53 of 1972), hereinafter reffered to as the act, which provides for the protection of wild animals and birds and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental there to ..... constitution. that fundamental right is subject to a reasonable restriction and that can be imposed. the wild life (protection) act is an act which provides for the protection of wild animals and birds and in order to protect them, restrictions and prohibitions have been imposed, which are reasonable and can be imposed. as rightly ..... 's representations and passed an order dated 28.4.1999 wherein he held that penning of cattle inside the indira gandhi wild life sanctuary is not permitted as per the wild life (protection ) act, 1972. however, he permitted the grazing of the cattle without penning. the writ petition is against this order.2 .....

T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2006(1)ALD(Cri)801; [2007(1)JCR99(SC)]; JT2006(4)SC454; 2006(4)SCALE232; (2006)10SCC480

..... main habitations and their maintenances by providing sufficient number of vents for the roads existing at the time of notification of kolleru wild life sanctuary under section 18 of wild life (protection) act, 1972 without permitting new roads and culverts.(7) right to maintain existing water courses and drains necessary to avert submersion ..... fishermen cooperative society; sanjaya gandhi fishermen co-operative society, sringavarappaduof krishna district will be cancelled. the claimants are not entitled to any compensation under wild life (protection) act, 1972 as they were assigned the lands by the government on free of land value.(11) d-farm pattas to the extent of ac. ..... of agricultural lands surrounding kolleru lake.(8) other rights and conditions as specified under section 27 to 34 and other provisions of the wild life (protection) act, 1972.(9) electricity connection shall be given for domestic use only and not for aquaculture or any activity connected therewith.(10) the 'd .....

Chewang Pintso Bhutia, East Sikkim and Another Vs. State of Sikkim thr ...

Court : Sikkim

..... mr. v. giri, essentially placed the same arguments as that of the state-respondent. it was submitted that the scope of the environment (protection) act, 1986 and the wild life (protection) act, 1972, envisages two different schemes. he took us through the various provisions to indicate the scope of these two legislations. he, however, emphasized ..... 20th meeting on 13-09-2010) in consideration of religious sentiments was far in excess of its power and mandate under the wild life (protection) act, 1972, which only provides for protection of wild animals, birds and plants and matters related thereto. however, as the present project did not require nbwl clearance, its parallel could ..... trees, loss of flora, effect upon at least 160 species of mammals most of which fall under the endangered species under schedule i of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, the avifauna, reptiles, butterflies, fish, etc. the report spells out the adverse impact on account of the immigration of construction workers to .....

Pradeep Krishen Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1996VAD(SC)94; AIR1996SC2040; JT1996(5)SC181; 1996(4)SCALE566; (1996)8SCC599; [1996]Supp2SCR697; 1996(2)LC414(SC)

..... chief conservator of forests (w.l.), madhya pradesh, bhopal. sub : extraction of forest produce from-national parks and sanctuaries consequent to the amendment of the wild-life (protection) act. ref. : this departments notification of even no. dated 13th dec. 1994. the following order is being circulated by the state government partly modifying its ..... around the boundaries thereof with the avowed object of maintenance of their traditional rights. the petitioner contends that this act of the state government is ultra-vires the provisions of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, as well as the petitioner's fundamental rights guaranteed by articles 14 and 21 of the constitution ..... a sanctuary and national park under section 18 and section 35, respectively, of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 can be exploited for the collection of minor forest produce in violation of the restrictions contained in the said act ?and(ii) whether the state government has the right to exploit minor forest produce .....

Kamla Kant Pandey S/O Shri Lalji Pandey Vs. State of U.P. Through Secr ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR2006All92; 2006(2)AWC1503

..... 1828.79 hectare of village' pakri (district mirzapur) as reserved forest. thereafter on 10.8.1982 a notification under section 18(1) of the wild life protection act, 1972 was issued constituting kaimur wild life sanctuary consisting of several van blocks. an area of 921.8 hectare of kanach van block and an area of 1406,7 hectares of pakri van ..... question of granting permission to the petitioner for doing mining operations in accordance with the provisions of section 29 of wild life (protection ) act. his contention was that there has been reference of section 29 of the above act in the order passed by the secretary but no specific finding has been recorded on this point and the order ..... however, the writ petition is allowed to this extent that the matter of grant of permission to the petitioner under section 29 of the wild life (protection ) act is remitted to the government for reconsideration in the light of the observations made in the body of the judgment with a further direction that .....

S.Subramaniam Vs. 1.The Chief Secretary/

Court : Chennai

..... as contained in chapter iv, it is with a view to impose certain restrictions for bearing in mind the object of the wild life protection act, which has been enacted to provide for protection of wild animals, birds and plants and for matters connected therewith or ancillary therewith, thereto with a view to ensuring the ecological and environmental ..... by the second respondent is on a thorough misconception of a legal position. by referring to section 34(3) of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, it is submitted that no new license under arms act 1959 shall be granted within a radius of ten kilometres of a sanctuary without the prior concurrence of the chief ..... the radius of eight kilometres from the forest land and therefore, the petitioner has to obtain 'no objection certificate' from the wild life warden as required under section 34(3) of the wile life (protection) act, 1972. challenging the said order, he preferred an appeal to the first respondent. after setting out the factual details, the .....

Dr. T. Patanjali Sastry, President, Environment Centre Vs. Chairman, A ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(5)ALT315

..... habitations and their maintenances by providing sufficient number of vents for the roads existing at the time of notification of kolleru wild life sanctuary u/s 18 of wild life (protection) act, 1972 without permitting new roads and culverts;(7) right to maintain existing water courses and drains necessary to avert submersion ..... of notification, fishing in traditional method is permitted without causing environment hazard till the government acquires such private lands under the provisions of the wild life protection act. the right to do traditional agriculture without using pesticides and chemicals is also permitted. the encroachment activities are directed to be removed forthwith. ..... society, sanjaya gandi fishermen co-operative society, srungavarappadu of krishna district will be cancelled. the claimants are not entitled to any compensation under wild life (protection) act, 1972 as they were assigned the lands by the government on free of land value;(11) d-form pattas to the extent of ac .....

Chandmari Tea Co. and anr. Etc. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... without any interference.4. petitioners' grievance is that by notification dated 13-6-85 issued by the respondent no. 6 under section 35 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 (for short 'the act, 1972') the govt. incorporated certain areas of kanchanguri village measuring about 89.754 hectors into the kaziranga national park. though as per the said ..... . however, rights of any kind may be allowed to be continued as per section 24(2)(c) ofthe wild life (protection) amendment act, 1991 with the consultation with the chief wild life warden.23. section 19 of the act, 1972 has also been amended vide gazette of india publication dated 20-9-91 to the effect that the ..... is seen that the publication of the notification and the addition of the areas to the kaziranga national! park and burachapori sanctuary were necessary for protection of the wild life and also to improve environment and to safeguard the forest of the country. while adding the areas in question to the national park/sanctuary in .....