The Jharkhand High Court on Thursday expressed strong displeasure with the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (PCCF) for failing to comply with judicial directives in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the Palamau Tiger Reserve (PTR). A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar has ordered the PCCF to appear in person at the next hearing to explain the failure to file a personal affidavit regarding tiger conservation efforts.
The court’s intervention comes amid growing concerns over the stagnant or declining population of big cats in the reserve, which was established in 1974. Despite repeated monitoring and orders from the High Court, the bench observed that the forest department appears to have lacked the necessary seriousness in addressing the critical issues facing the PTR.
The primary point of contention arose when the PCCF submitted an affidavit through a subordinate officer rather than in a personal capacity. The High Court summarily rejected this filing, noting that specific information requested by the court—following suggestions made by the amicus curiae—was required to be provided directly by the PCCF.
The Division Bench observed that the PCCF seemingly failed to review the court’s previous orders or treat the matter with the requisite gravity. “The PCCF has not gone through the orders of the high court and did not take it seriously,” the bench remarked, while directing the official to address the court personally on the next scheduled date.
The Palamau Tiger Reserve, one of India’s earliest tiger habitats, has been under the scanner for its inability to demonstrate progress in tiger population growth. In earlier stages of the hearing, the High Court noted with concern that there has been no official record of an increase in the number of big cats, nor have significant steps been documented to bolster their numbers.
The ongoing litigation was initiated through a PIL filed by Vikas Mahto, who sought judicial intervention for the upkeep and better management of the reserve. The court has been actively monitoring the status of the PTR, passing several orders to the state government to ensure a visible rise in the tiger population and improved conservation protocols.
The court’s demand for a personal appearance underscores the shift toward strict administrative accountability in environmental and wildlife preservation cases. By rejecting the subordinate’s affidavit, the High Court has emphasized that senior-most officials must take direct responsibility for the execution of conservation policies and the implementation of judicial orders.
