Applicant Says MoEFCC Holds Statutory Authority To Notify Eco-Sensitive Zones Around Protected Areas
NEW DELHI (India CSR): Dr. Sharad Gupta, the applicant in a pending National Green Tribunal matter concerning the Soor Sarovar Bird Sanctuary in Agra, has filed a rejoinder challenging the State of Uttar Pradesh’s declaration of a zero-kilometre Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) around newly added areas of the sanctuary. The rejoinder was filed on August 10, 2026, in Original Application No. 529 of 2023, Dr. Sharad Gupta vs Union of India & Ors. It responds to an additional progress report dated July 10, 2026, filed by the Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Western Region, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur. The NGT had taken that progress report on record on July 13, 2026. The matter is listed for hearing on September 24, 2026.
Case Background Details
The applicant’s rejoinder relates to the Eco-Sensitive Zone around extended land parcels of the Soor Sarovar Bird Sanctuary. It refers to two Uttar Pradesh notifications dated December 27, 2024: one concerning 380.558 hectares under Section 26A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, and another concerning 14.5025 hectares under Section 18 of the Act. According to the rejoinder, the State notifications declared the ESZ around the newly included areas as zero kilometres. The applicant has disputed the legal basis for that declaration and has asked the tribunal to examine the records leading to the issuance of the notifications.
CEC Letter Cited
The applicant has referred to a letter dated January 29, 2026, issued by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh. According to the rejoinder, the CEC asked the State to immediately amend the notifications of December 27, 2024 concerning the 380.558-hectare and 14.5025-hectare parcels. The rejoinder states that the CEC’s letter said the statutory power to notify an ESZ rests with the Central Government through the Ministry o f Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, read with Rule 5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986. The CEC letter is stated to have been annexed to the additional progress report of July 10, 2026.
Matter Involves Notifications Relating To 380.558 Hectares And 14.5025 Hectares Of Sanctuary Land
Timeline Under Scrutiny
The applicant has referred to an earlier further progress report dated March 17, 2026, which was considered by the NGT on March 19, 2026. According to the rejoinder, paragraph 10 of that earlier report contained an undertaking that a final notification under Section 26A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, concerning the 14.5025-hectare parcel would be issued by May 1, 2026. The rejoinder states that the CEC letter dated January 29, 2026, had been forwarded by the Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Western Region, Kanpur, to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Uttar Pradesh, through a letter dated March 13, 2026. The applicant has submitted that the March 17 progress report did not refer to the CEC letter. These are submissions made by the applicant in the rejoinder and have not been adjudicated by the tribunal in the document provided.
ESZ Authority Question
The applicant has argued that Uttar Pradesh could not itself declare a zero-kilometre ESZ around the additional sanctuary land. The rejoinder states that no proposal for deciding, declaring or notifying the ESZ for these areas was sent by the State to the MoEFCC. The rejoinder relies on decisions cited as Goa Foundation vs Union of India & Ors. and T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India & Ors. It states that the MoEFCC is required to examine State proposals through the prescribed process before ESZs are declared under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The applicant has annexed copies of the Supreme Court’s June 3, 2022 judgment and April 26, 2023 clarificatory judgment in the T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad matter.
Officials’ Records Sought
In the prayer portion of the rejoinder, Dr. Gupta has requested the NGT to direct the State of Uttar Pradesh to place on record the complete chain of official file notings, draft proposals and correspondence that led to the December 27, 2024 notifications. The applicant has specifically sought the production of the proposal stated to have been placed for obtaining the Governor of Uttar Pradesh’s assent. The rejoinder also asks the tribunal to take on record what it describes as admissions in the additional progress report concerning the ESZ declaration and the CEC communication.
Proceedings Requested Before Tribunal
The applicant has also sought directions for departmental inquiries and legal proceedings against officials named in the rejoinder, ranging from the Deputy Conservator of Forests, National Chambal Sanctuary Project, Agra, to the Principal Secretary of the Environment Department, Uttar Pradesh. These requests form part of the applicant’s prayer before the NGT. The rejoinder does not record any finding by the tribunal on the allegations or the reliefs sought. The matter remains pending before the tribunal.
Source: Rejoinder filed by applicant Dr. Sharad Gupta to the additional progress report dated July 10, 2026, in OA No. 529 of 2023 before the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.
© Copyright Disclaimer: All rights reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced, republished, distributed or transmitted in any form without prior written permission from India CSR®
