Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: wild life protection act 1972 section 26 delegation of collector s powers Court: kerala Page 2 of about 61 results (0.657 seconds)

Kottayam Nature Society Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2003(3)KLT1105

..... terms of the notification dated february 19, 1991. the petitioner maintains that there are six species of rare birds on the island. the provisions of section 29 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 have been violated.16. in o.p. no. 6832 of 2002 it is alleged that the cabinet had met on august 28, 2001. it had decided to ..... coastal regulation zone i. there are six species of rare birds on the island. the action is not only violative of the kerala land reforms' act, 1964 but it also violates the provisions of the wild life (protection) act, 1972.18. mr. ramesh babu, learned counsel for the petitioner in o.p. no. 6632 of 2002 submitted that the cabinet had taken ..... bird sanctuary, if any, may be taken care of. however, the issue is- does a sanctuary exist at the site? under section 18 of the wild life (protection) act, the state government has been empowered to declare 'its intention to constitute any area other than an area comprised within any reserved forest or the territorial waters as .....

State of Kerala Vs. The Secretary,paramekkara Devaswam

Court : Kerala

..... .8.2014 in w.p (c).no.17848 of 2014 has correctly interpreted section 43 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972? wa.1650/14 & connected cases15iv. what is the procedure statutorily prescribed under the wild life (protection) act or the kerala wild life (protection) rules to transport elephants from outside the state or to transport elephants from the state of kerala to ..... purchase an elephant from any other state in india and to bring the animal to state of kerala in the light of section 43(2) of the wild life protection act, 1972. ii. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction wa.1650/14 & connected cases7directing the ..... wa.1650/14 & connected cases5"i am to inform that your application for availing an elephant is not permissible as per section 43(1) of the wild life (protection) act, 1972". the petitioner in the writ petition has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents to give prior permission to the petitioner to procure and transport .....

Planters Forum Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

..... repugnant to various central laws is inoperative and void. the act is enacted to take over property of private persons under the guise of protecting forests. provisions of the act are violative of the provisions of the indian forest act, 1927 and wild life protection act, 1972, hence the provisions of the 2003 act to take over private properties are legally unenforceable. (xi) the state legislature has no authority ..... the reply. the counter affidavit states that as per article 48a of the constitution of india, the state is obliged to endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country. the 2003 act is in conformity with article 48a and 51a(g) of the constitution. the subject 'forest', coming as item no.17a under the .....

State of Kerala Vs. Odiase Austin Goubadia

Court : Kerala

..... proving that the accused persons herein were found in possession of snake venom in contravention of the provisions of section 44(1)(c) of the wild life (protection) act................".14. pw-10 in cross-examination has admitted that snake venom contain proteins and enzymes and that if artificial combination of proteins and enzymes are ..... clearly come out in evidence that the sample from the mo4 series were taken before mo4 series had reached the court. section 50(4) of the wild life (protection) act clearly mandates that the seized articles shall be forthwith produced before the jurisdictional magistrate concerned. therefore, this provision in section 50(4) is unlike the ..... .a.673/14 & cc. - :54. :- seized articles to the court is in violation of the mandatory provisions of section 50(4) of the wild life (protection) act. therefore, this court cannot safely hold that the samples taken from the contraband has actually been taken from the contraband seized allegedly from the possession of the .....

Green Cross World Environment Protection Action Group Vs. Union of Ind ...

Court : Kerala

..... protect the tigers in exercise of the powers vested in the central government as provided under the wild life protection act in the light of the increasing instances of man-animal conflict. (iv) issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ, order or direction ..... appropriate writ, order or direction directing the investigation team to identify those forest officials who hunted and killed the tiger and to prosecute them for committing the offences under the wild life protection act. (iii) issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 to formulate guidelines to .....

Forest Range Officer, Chungathara Ii Range Vs. Aboobacker and anr.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 1989CriLJ2038

..... be called a 'police officer' and a statement made to him will not be hit by section 25 of the evidence act'. neither the kerala forest act nor the wild life protection act conferred all the powers of police officers on the forest officers or wild life protection force even though some of the powers have been conferred on them to be exercised in specified contexts. it is therefore ..... officer,! who instituted the prosecution, has presented this appeal with special leave against the said acquittal hunting of wild animals is prohibited under section 9 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 (for short 'the act'). the trial magistrate who convicted the two respondents under section 51 of the act sentenced them to rigordus imprisonment for six months and a fine of rs. 500/- each being the .....

V.K. Thomas Vs. the Revenue Board Member (L.R.)

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 1988CriLJ336

..... kilns, though perhaps on a small scale. that may amount to a violation of the provisions of the forest laws. open violation of the provisions of the wild life protection act, as is evident from the evidence relating to hunting undertaken by many also goes apparently unnoticed and unchecked. there was a time, here and elsewhere when ..... mind in the context. if there is a distinct threat to the wild life entitled to statutory protection (the schedule to the wild life act is fairly long and exhaustive about the species for whom the protective cover is now 'extended) by a possible abuse of the arms licence to be granted, the authorities ..... it is necessary to ensure that antisocial elements are not allowed to take undue advantage of the arms act. the impact of the constitutional 'background, and particularly the thrust placed therein on the protection of the forests and the wild life as obligated under articles 48a and 51a(g) of the constitution will have to be kept in .....

Podiyan Vs. the State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

..... protecting the natural forest wealth and so the persons who plunders that natural wealth should be dealt with properly ..... risk." 18. it is submitted that though the said decision was rendered under the pfa act, the ratio enunciated by the supreme court applies to all such offences which affects the society at large. the offence under the wild life protection act and the provisions of the forest act are to be treated as provisions which are enacted with the object of ..... clause (a) of sub-section (1) of this section or the occupation referred to in clause (b) of that sub-section after such date.11. wild life (protection) amendment act, 1991 came into force with effect from 02.10.1991. in view of sub sec.2 of sec.49b quoted above even if any licence was granted or .....

P.M. Shameer and Another Vs. State of Kerala, Represented by Public Pr ...

Court : Kerala

..... of the above decision, it is revealed that the honourable apex court has laid down the dictum therein after considering the scope of section 50 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972. the discussion and findings of the apex court in paragraphs 11 and 12 of the above decision are quoted hereunder for convenience. 11. we ..... and discussion is quite relevant in the present case also. as indicated earlier, there is no provision like section 50(4) of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, in the kerala forest act 1961 directing the officer, who effected the seizure, to produce the person detained or things seized before the magistrate to deal with according to ..... court has laid down the dictum after considering the various provisions including section 50 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, a special act and whereas in the present case, the case is covered by the various provisions of the kerala forest act, 1961. it is also the contention of mr. prasun, learned counsel appearing for the .....

Pradeep @ Biju Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

..... present order shall have effect only over the crime investigated by police for the abkari offences, that alone. so far as the offences covered by wild life protection act, which is stated to be under investigation by forest officials petitioners have to seek for bail, separately, in accordance with law. i. petitioners shall ..... stag, an animal included under schedule (i) of wild life protection act. later, on their production before magistrate they were remanded to judicial custody. though the crime was registered for offences under the abkari act, and also the wild life protection act, since offences falling under the latter act are to be investigated by notified authority thereunder, it is ..... of thrissur east police station registered for offences punishable under sections 8(1) and (2) of the keraka abkari act and sections 2(31)(b), 9, 31, 49b and 51 of the wild life protection act, 1972. they have filed the above application seeking their release on bail under section 439 of the code of .....