Bombay Natural History Society vs. Union Of India& Ors.

ITEM NO.12-PH COURT NO.3 SECTION PIL(W) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 50/2008 WILDLIFE TRUST OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for direction/stay and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) WITH W.P.(C) No. 514/2006 (With office report) W.P.(C) No. 109/2008 (With appln(s) for directions and exemption from filing O.T. and ex-Parte stay and permission to file addl. documents and Office Report) T.C.(C) No. 85/2011 T.C.(C) No. 87/2011 T.C.(C) No. 39/2015 (With appln(s) for directions and impleadment as party respondent) T.C.(C) No. 41/2015 T.C.(C) No. 59/2015 T.C.(C) No. 103/2015 T.C.(C) No. 132/2015 T.C.(C) No. 3/2016 Date : 31/03/2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Adv. Digitally signed by DEEPAK MANSUKHANI Date: 2017.04.01 11:12:02 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified

Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv.

• Mr. P. K. Manohar,Adv.
• Ms. Purnima Bhat,Adv.

2

• Mr. Sandeep Jha, Adv. Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Adv. State of Goa Mr. Anshuman Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Apoorva Bhumesh, Adv. Mr. T. Mahipal, Adv. State of Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Adv. Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv. Ms. Vanita Vashistha, Adv. State of Haryana Mr. Piyush Hans, Adv. Mr. Arun Tewatia, Adv. Mr. Amit Arora, Adv. Mr. Anil Grover, Adv. State of HP Mr. D.K. Thakur, AAG Mr. V.K. Sharma, Adv. State of J&K Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, Adv. Ms. Fauzia Shakil, Adv. Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Adv. Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. State of Jharkhand Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. R.K. Ojha, Adv. State of Kerala Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, Adv. Ms. Anu K. Joy, Adv. State of Karnataka Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., Adv. Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv. Ms. K. Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv. Ms. Romsha Raj, Adv. State of MP Mr. Arjun Garg, Adv. Mr. Manish Yadav, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Adv. State of MaharashtraMr. Mahaling Pandarge, Adv. Mr. Nishant Katneshwarkar, Adv. State of Manipur Mr. Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Adv. Ms. B. Khushbansi, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar Gaur, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kr. Singh, Adv. State of Meghalaya Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Adv.
• 3

State of Mizoram Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shikhar Garg, Adv. Mr. Ganesh Bapu, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, Adv. State of Nagaland Mr. Edward Belho, AAG Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. K. Luikant Michael, Adv. Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Adv. Ms. Elix Gangmei, Adv. Govt. of Puducherry Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Adv. Mr. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv. State of Rajasthan Mr. S.S. Shamshery, AAG Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ankit Raj, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. State of Sikkim Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv. Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv. Mr. Amit Arora, Adv. M/s.Arputham Aruna & Co. State of Tamil Nadu Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, Adv. Ms. Nithya, Adv. Ms. Mahalakshmi, Adv. Mr. Partha Sarathi, Adv. State of Telangana Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv. Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Adv. State of UP Mr. Vikrant Yadav, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Pratap, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Yadav, Adv. State of UttarakhandMr. J.K. Bhatia, Adv. Mr. T.N. Rama Rao, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. T. Keera Reddy, Adv. for Mr. A.K. Chopra, Adv. Mr. Tara Chandra Sharma, Adv. Mr. G. Prakash, Adv. Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Adv.

4

Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, Adv. Mr. Shibhashish Mishra, Adv. Mr. Kuldip Singh, Adv. Mr. Parijat Sinha, Adv. Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Adv. Mr. Shuvodeep Rai, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Adv. Mr. Rajat Joseph, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Annam D.N. Rao, Adv. Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Adv. Mr. B.S. Banthia, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

The matter was heard at length on one of the issues of legislative competence of the Parliament to enact Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for various parties on the above-mentioned question, we are of the opinion that the submissions on the other issues are also required to be heard, to have a comprehensive view of the matter.

All the learned counsel appearing for the parties agree that the matters be taken up for hearing after summer vacation.

List the matters after summer vacation.

Written submissions with regard to the issue of legislative competence be filed within two weeks.

(DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-cum-PS Court Master