JOIN USHC dismisses petition against 'Cauvery Calling'
The High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition questioning the ‘Cauvery Calling’ project, of planting saplings along the Cauvery river bed. A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum said that planting saplings on barren government land is not a crime and no statutory provision is shown barring citizens from planting trees on government land.
In the 2019 PIL, the petitioner had sought directions to restrain Isha Outreach of Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, from collecting money from the public and planting saplings on government land without due permission. The petition was subsequently converted into a suo motu.
The bench observed that a categorical statement has been made by the state government that the project is not a government project and planting of saplings is not being carried out on public land.
“In case such a view is taken that planting trees on government land is prohibited, it will create havoc and a large number of plantations which are going on government land by NGOs without any motive will come to a standstill,” the court said.
The bench referred to an Apex Court judgment on the effects of loss of forest cover.
“Therefore, the only remedy available to save mankind and planet earth is afforestation, which is being done by respondent 3 (Isha Outreach). The efforts by the respondent 3, certainly requires appreciation,” the bench said.
The PIL contended that Isha Outreach cannot be allowed to collect money from the public, which intends to plant 253 crore saplings along the Cauvery basin on public donation of Rs 42 per sapling.
The petition alleged that the project has falsely claimed that both the union government and Karnataka government have approved the project.
On October 15, 2020, the bench converted the petition into suo motu after the petitioner justified his stand of sending an e-mail to a television channel, stating that airing of the programme on Cauvery Calling would amount to contempt of court.
Subsequently, it was informed to the court that the order converting the PIL into a suo motu petition was challenged before the Supreme Court.
Check out DH's latest videos