Premium
This is an archive article published on May 29, 2015

HC grants compensation for trees damaged by animals

The court rejected the argument of the government pleader on the different “behavioral pattern” of blue bulls.

trees damaged, damages by animal, mumbai high court, Government Resolution of 2010, mumbai news, city news, local news, maharashtra news, Indian ExpressA woman who sought compensation for her orange trees that were damaged by wild blue bulls in Kalmeshwar taluka, Nagpur district, was finally provided relief by the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court. She had been earlier denied compensation by the deputy chief conservator of forests in Nagpur.

The forest department and other higher authorities had said that under a Government Resolution of 2010, there was no clause to pay compensation for damage caused to fruit bearing trees by wild animals like blue-bulls or wild-boars. The court, while hearing the case, however, said the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation for the damages caused to the orange trees.

[related-post]

Justices B P Dharmadhikari and S B Shukre observed in a recent order that the law “expects every citizen to be the protector and nurturer of wild animals, therefore, it cannot be expected of citizens to bear the loss occasioned by them because of these wild animals.”

The HC further observed that a GR dated July 2, 2010, while allowing payment of compensation for damage to crops by greater variety of wild animals acknowledges the fact that the wild animals specified, in particular the blue bull, is capable of destroying crops. But the very same resolution does not accept the same fact when it comes to payment of compensation for loss of fruit bearing trees caused by the blue bull.

“The blue bull is a herbivore, just like the wild elephant and Indian bison and therefore cannot be seen as showing a different behaviourial pattern in the sense that it would feed only on grasses and foliage but not on fruit bearing trees. The fact that blue bulls exhibit the same tendencies as elephants and bison has been accepted by the Government and it is evident from its subsequent GR of September 5 , 2013, which takes into account loss caused to crops as well as fruit-bearing trees by not only elephants and bison but also by other animals including the blue bull,” said the HC.

The court rejected the argument of the government pleader on the different “behavioral pattern” of blue bulls.

“This inevitably leads to the conclusion that the resolution of July 2, 2010, violates principle of equality enshrined in Article 14 (equality before law) of the Constitution of India by resorting to irrational classification,” added the court.

Story continues below this ad

The HC said the petitioner is entitled to receive compensation for the damages to the orange trees under the resolution issued in 2010. “The petitioner would be entitled to receive compensation for the said 100 orange trees at Rs 200 per tree,” said the court.

According to the petitioner, she had planted 125 orange saplings in her agricultural land in Kalmeshwar, in Nagpur. On the night of April 7, 2012 , a herd of blue-bulls descended upon the orange plantation and broke their branches.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the 2010 GR makes no provision for payment of compensation for the loss caused to orange trees,, by a blue-bull while allowing payment of compensation for the loss caused to fruit-bearing trees by wild elephants and Indian bison.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement