Uttarakhand govt’s efforts to curb forest fires ‘lackadaisical’: SC
The Supreme Court summoned the state’s chief secretary to appear before it on Friday and explain lapses in utilising funds, large vacancies in forest department posts, lack of firefighting equipment and deployment of forest officials and vehicles on poll duty and the Char Dham yatra, despite exemptions
The Uttarakhand government is lackadaisical in controlling forest fires, the Supreme Court said on Wednesday, summoning the state’s chief secretary to appear before it on Friday and explain lapses in utilising funds, large vacancies in forest department posts, lack of firefighting equipment and deployment of forest officials and vehicles on poll duty and the Char Dham yatra despite exemptions granted by the Election Commission.
Considering the importance of forests across the country, a bench headed by justice BR Gavai passed a general direction barring deployment of forest officials or vehicles for poll duty. The order said, “We direct that in all states and Union territories, forest staff and forest vehicles shall not be requisitioned for election purpose or any other purpose such as Char Dham yatra.”
The Centre was also asked to inform about the total funds allocated to Uttarakhand under centrally sponsored schemes (CSS) and money available under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA).
The bench, also comprising justices SVN Bhatti and Sandeep Mehta, said, “We are at pains to say that the approach of Uttarakhand in controlling the fires, to say the least, is lackadaisical.”
Posting the matter for Friday, the court said, “We direct the chief secretary of Uttarakhand to personally remain present in court on May 17 and explain as to why CAMPA funds of only ₹3.4 crore were released for 2023-24 when the Union sanctioned ₹9.12 crore.”
The state was further asked to explain why state disaster management funds (SDMF) were not released for tackling forest fires and questioned if the balance from the CAMPA funds was diverted for any non-forest activity. The court also sought details of vacancies in forest posts and timelines for filling them, reasons for lack of supply of firefighting equipment for forest personnel at the district and taluka level, and deployment of forest officials for poll duty.
A note prepared by advocate K Parmeshwar assisting the court as amicus curiae showed that fires were still raging over an area spread across 40 hectares of forest in the state and on May 9, when the top court took note of the matter, the state said the “emergency” situation is over though five large fires (covering more than 200 hectares) were raging. He quoted state reports to suggest that in 2022, over 2,186 fires were reported, which affected 3,425 hectares of forest land.
Parmeshwar said though the state has an action plan in place for mitigation of forest fires, it lacks in implementation.
His note said that in 2023-24, the Centre under CSS sanctioned ₹14.02 crore, of which only ₹3.75 crore was released. On CAMPA funds last year, he said of the ₹8 crore sanctioned, only ₹3.40 crore was released for mitigating forest fires. On vacancies, Parmeshwar cited a major manpower crunch with over 1,000 of 3,650 sanctioned posts of forest guards and more than 200 of 1,729 forester posts being vacant.
“The rosy picture presented to us on the last date by the state does not seem to be correct,” the bench said, adding, “Though an action plan has been prepared and finalised, no steps have been taken to implement it.”
The Uttarakhand government, represented by deputy advocate general Jatinder Kumar Sethi, said the state has additionally filled up 1,250 vacant posts and will gradually close the gap on vacancies. He said the state depends on central funds for protecting forests, having limited sources of revenue and explained that in February, when the fires started, there were 137 large forest fires, and by last week, these fires decreased significantly, which made him say that the “emergency situation” was over.
The court said, “Last time you said only 0.01% of forests in the state is on fire. But the note by amicus says it is much more. You cannot compare the entire state. This is a wrong comparison.” Not willing to buy state’s reasoning, the bench said, “On one hand, the state contends that manpower and vehicles are not available and on other hand, it keeps a large number of vacancies unfilled.”
The court failed to understand non-availability of funds when CAMPA funds from last year remained unutilised. “Chief secretary should explain whether the said fund (CAMPA) is being utilised for other purposes not connected to forest activity.”
Parmeshwar said general elections in Uttarakhand were completed in the first phase of voting, and there are various orders issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) and even by the state’s principal secretary exempting forest staff and vehicles from poll duty.
The court said, “When there is an exemption, you are just trying to find out an excuse. It is a very sorry state of affairs. Are these officers being deployed in assembly elections too? We don’t know as many of the state’s statements seem to be either excuses or are incorrect.”
Sethi suggested formation of an expert body to consider various aspects of the matter. The court was not inclined as it was informed that the Centre had already constituted a three-member team to take immediate steps to control forest fires in the state.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati appearing for the Centre informed the court that central funds were made available to the state under CSS and CAMPA. Though figures under CSS were not readily available, Bhati contradicted the figures provided by the amicus on CAMPA funds. According to her, the Centre released ₹9.12 crore in the last financial year and a further amount of ₹10 crore in April this year.
Uttarakhand’s principal conservator of forests D Mohan, appearing through video conferencing, admitted that some forest officials were deployed for poll duty. He informed the bench that ₹3.4 crore was spent out of CAMPA last year and, this year, allocation of ₹2 crore has been done already.