CWP No. 15701 of 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 15701 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:- 02.02.2011 Inder Singh son of Kartar Singh, r/o village Beli, Tehsil and District Ropar. ......Petitioner Vs State of Punjab and others. ......Respondents CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Padam Kant Diwedi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Madhu Dayal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No. 1 to 3 and 5. Mr. M.S. Bedi, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Advocate, for respondents No. 6 and 7. * * * * RANJAN GOGOI, A.C.J. (ORAL) C.M. No. 15646 of 2010 Reply filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 is taken on record. CWP No. 15701 of 2009 This PIL has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents No. 1 to 5 to take necessary action against the respondents No. 6 and 7 for violating the provisions of the Wild Life CWP No. 15701 of 2009 (O&M) 2 (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' only) and to take necessary steps to check the rampant killing of wild animals in the forests of Ropar District. Specifically, it has been complained that the respondents No. 6 and 7 have put up an electrified fencing around their fields and in the process many different species of wild life have been killed upon coming into contact with the electrified fencing. The materials on record would go to show that presently a prosecution against the respondents No. 6 and 7 under different Sections of the Act is going on and furthermore departmental action is being contemplated against the officials who had failed to carry out their duties under the Act. The latter fact is evident from the affidavit dated 31.01.2011 filed today in Court by the learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab. That apart, from the rejoinder filed by the State of Punjab it appears that regular checks are being carried out to ensure strict implementation of the provisions of the Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would like to assert that even as on date the electrified fencing of the respondents No. 6 and 7 exists and also that effective monitoring steps have not been undertaken by the authorities to ensure the safety of the wild life. Taking into account what has transpired from the materials on record, as noticed above, as well as the subsisting grievance of the petitioner as expressed by his Counsel, we are of the view that this PIL should be disposed of, at this stage, by directing the initiation of appropriate legal action against the erring officials as mentioned in the CWP No. 15701 of 2009 (O&M) 3 affidavit dated 31.01.2011 filed by the Chief Wildlife Warden, Punjab. The said authority is also directed to ensure that regular and effective monitoring is carried out to ensure the safety of the wild life in the forests of Ropar District. In the event the petitioner is left with any grievance it will always be open to him to approach this Court once again, if he is so advised. PIL shall stand disposed of in the above terms. (RANJAN GOGOI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE 02.02.2011 Amodh