Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 29.05.2020 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ Appeal No 109/2020, by which, the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by the State of Kerala and others – respondent(s) herein and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. As per sub-section (2) of Section 40, no person shall, after the commencement of this Act, 1972, acquire, receive, keep in his control, custody or possession, the animal specified in Schedule I or Part II of Schedule II or any animal article including the deer horn, except with the previous permission in writing of the Chief Wild Life Warden or the authorised officer. Sub-section (2) of Section 40, provides that any action taken or purported to be taken for violation of Section 40 of the Act, 1972 at any time before the commencement of the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002 shall not be proceeded with and all pending proceedings shall stand abated. (2) The Chief Wild Life Warden or the officer authorised by the State Government in this regard shall take necessary action to assist the local communities and individuals especially the poor and illiterate in the declaration of their possession, filling up the specified form and any other matter connected therewith and shall make every attempt to ensure that no individual or community associated with animals is deprived of this opportunity.
Procedure for filing applications.—(1)
An application to the Chief Wild Life Warden or the officer authorised by the State Government in this regard shall be presented in the Form annexed to these rules by the applicant either in person or by an agent or by duly authorised legal practitioner or sent by registered post addressed to the Chief Wild Life Warden or the officer authorised by the State Government in this regard of the concerned State or the Union Territory. (4) If the applicant fails to rectify the defect within the time allowed under sub-rule (3), the Chief Wild Life Warden or the officer authorised by the State Government in this regard may, by order and for the reasons to be recorded in writing, decline to register the application.
Hearing on application ex parte.—Where on the date fixed for hearing the application, the applicant fails to appear without intimation, the Chief Wild Life Warden or the officer authorised by the State Government in this regard may at their discretion adjourn or decide the application ex parte.
Certificate of ownership.—(1)
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/acquisition-of-land-and-deemed-lapse-under-the-act-2013/
The Chief Wild Life Warden shall provide a certificate of ownership to the applicant whose claim is found valid.
— Every order passed on the application shall be communicated to the applicant either in person or by registered post free of cost.” Therefore, as per Rule 4(2), the application to the Chief Wild Life Warden for such declaration, shall have to be presented in the prescribed format within a period of 180 days from the date of publication of these rules. The order passed by the learned Single Judge was the subject matter of the present writ appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court.
It is submitted that therefore, no prejudice shall be caused if the application for ownership certificate/declaration is made beyond the prescribed period provided under Rule 4(2) of the Rules, 2003.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/taxation-of-engineering-design-drawings-goods-or-services/
It is submitted that looking to the object and purpose of Section 40 and 40A and the Rules, 2003 and when the specific time limit has been prescribed to submit an application for ownership certification/declaration, the same has to be adhered to as observed and held by the High Court by the impugned judgment and order. As per Section 40A, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections (2) and (4) of Section 40 of the Act, 1972, the Central Government may, by notification, require any person to declare to the Chief Wild Life Warden or the authorised officer, any captive animal, animal article, etc., in his control, custody or possession, in respect of which no declaration had been made under sub-section (1) or sub- section (4) of Section 40 and in exercise of powers conferred under Section 40A, the Central Government has framed the Rules, 2003.
Case Title: VISHALAKSHI AMMA Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA (2023 INSC 255)
Case Number: C.A. No.-001720-001720 / 2023
