Raj HC overturns wildlife panel’s rejection of Taj Amber clearance

Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has set aside a National Board for Wildlife panel decision that denied wildlife clearance to Taj Amber, a five-star property located about 97 metres from the Nahargarh Wildlife Sanctuary boundary.

Justice Sameer Jain, in an order passed Monday and uploaded Tuesday, allowed a petition by Kanha Hotels and Spa Pvt Ltd, holding that the standing committee of the National Board for Wildlife failed to consider earlier statutory permissions granted to the project before rejecting clearance on Feb 28, 2024.

“The petitioner’s project unequivocally qualifies as an existing unit, having secured requisite approvals prior to the cut-off dates. Therefore, it is not subject to the rigours applicable to new constructions,” the court observed.

Senior Advocate R B Mathur, appearing for the company, argued the project should be treated as an “existing unit” under eco-sensitive zone rules because it had received multiple approvals over the years. He told the court the company bought land at Village Chimanpura, Amer, Jaipur, in Jan 1995, after the district collector had converted the land from agricultural to industrial use in May 1994, with additional land permissions granted in 1998.

Mathur said the tourism department approved the project for a star-category hotel on March 24, 2007, under the New Hotel Policy. The Jaipur Development Authority approved the building plan on Jan 13, 2011, valid till 2017 and later extended up to 2020.

The court also relied on environmental clearance granted on June 23, 2017, after appraisal by the State Level Expert Appraisal Committee, which examined the project cost, location, water requirement and environmental management measures.

The bench noted the fire department issued the required no-objection certificate, the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board granted ‘Consent to Establish’ in June 2020 and ‘Consent to Operate’ in Nov 2022, and a completion certificate was issued in Feb 2023 after compliance with building regulations.

The court referred to a March 4, 2020, site inspection report by the deputy conservator of forests recommending wildlife clearance, stating the project would have no negative impact on the sanctuary and did not fall in any wildlife corridor.

Justice Jain termed the wildlife panel’s rejection “arbitrary, non-speaking and passed without granting the company an opportunity of hearing,” and said authorities ignored substantial material already on record, including prior approvals from competent departments.