Learn the critical steps outlined by the Supreme Court of India to protect the endangered Great Indian Bustard, highlighting innovative conservation measures and legal milestones.

Introduction

The Great Indian Bustard (GIB), a critically endangered bird, predominantly inhabits the arid and grassland regions of Rajasthan and Gujarat. With its population plummeting due to habitat destruction and collisions with overhead power lines, immediate conservation measures are necessary. This article delves into the pivotal Supreme Court case, M.K. Ranjitsinh vs Union of India, which highlights actionable steps to protect the species.

Fact of the Case

The Great Indian Bustard’s dwindling numbers have raised significant concerns, leading to its classification as “critically endangered” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. One major threat identified is fatal collisions with overhead electrical transmission wires.

In 2019, a writ petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution sought the Supreme Court’s intervention. The Court issued an interim order on April 19, 2021, prohibiting overhead power lines in a 99,000 square kilometer region, mandating their underground installation, and requiring the immediate use of bird diverters.

However, concerns about the implications for solar power generation and India’s commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement prompted the Ministries of Environment, Forests, Climate Change, Power, and New and Renewable Energy to request a revision of the Court’s order.

Issues of the Case

1. What immediate and long-term actions are necessary to protect the Great Indian Bustard?
2. Should the Supreme Court’s restriction on overhead power lines in critical habitats be reexamined?
3. Does the establishment of an expert committee for ongoing monitoring and data collection ensure better conservation outcomes?

Judgment

On March 21, 2024, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment. The bench, presided over by Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Justice Jamshed B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, emphasized the necessity of balancing biodiversity conservation with the nation’s renewable energy goals.

While reversing the blanket ban on overhead transmission lines, the Court directed:

• Establishment of an expert committee: Tasked with assessing the feasibility of underground lines and evaluating bird diverters’ effectiveness.
• Timeline for findings: The committee must submit its report by July 31, 2024.

This balanced approach underscores the need for innovative solutions to protect the GIB without compromising renewable energy commitments.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in the M.K. Ranjitsinh vs Union of India case reaffirms that the right to live free from the adverse effects of climate change is enshrined in Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. By mandating a scientific and collaborative approach, the judgment serves as a pivotal step towards conserving not only the Great Indian Bustard but also India’s broader ecological heritage.