Introduction:

In a significant judicial development, the Supreme Court of India has directed the Chief Secretary of Uttarakhand to provide a detailed affidavit addressing allegations of misutilization of funds allocated under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA). These funds, intended to enhance the nation’s green cover, have reportedly been diverted for unauthorized expenditures, including the purchase of electronic gadgets and renovation projects. The case in question is titled “IN RE: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Versus Union of India and Others,” bearing the writ petition number W.P.(C) No. 202/1995.

Background of the Parties:

1. Petitioner: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad, an environmental activist known for his extensive legal interventions aimed at forest conservation in India.
2. Respondents: Union of India and Others, encompassing various state governments and forest authorities implicated in the management and utilization of CAMPA funds.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

1. Misutilization of CAMPA Funds: The petitioner highlighted findings from a Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report indicating that Uttarakhand’s forest authorities diverted CAMPA funds for inadmissible activities. These activities included the purchase of iPhones, laptops, refrigerators, coolers, and expenses related to building renovations and court cases. Such expenditures are inconsistent with the primary objective of CAMPA, which is to facilitate compensatory afforestation and enhance forest cover.
2. Non-Compliance with Financial Obligations: The petitioner pointed out that, as per Sections 4(5) and 4(6) of the Compensatory Afforestation Funds Act, the state is required to deposit interest accrued on the balance available under the State Compensatory Afforestation Funds (SCAF). However, records indicate that the Uttarakhand government failed to discharge an interest liability amounting to ₹275.34 crores for the period between 2019-20 and 2021-22. This non-compliance signifies a serious lapse in financial accountability.
3. Delays in Compensatory Afforestation: The petitioner underscored that compensatory afforestation, mandated to be executed within a year or two growing seasons after receiving CAMPA funds, was delayed in several instances. In numerous cases, afforestation activities commenced approximately eight years post the final clearance, leading to substantial cost escalations amounting to crores of rupees.

Respondent’s (Uttarakhand State Government) Arguments:

1. Justification of Expenditures: The Uttarakhand government contended that certain expenditures, though appearing inadmissible, were essential for the effective functioning of the forest department. For instance, the procurement of electronic devices was argued to be necessary for administrative efficiency and field operations.
2. Partial Compliance with Interest Deposits: The state acknowledged the delay in depositing the interest but asserted that corrective measures had been initiated. Specifically, in July 2023, an amount of ₹150 crores was deposited towards the interest liability, reflecting the state’s commitment to rectifying financial discrepancies.
3. Challenges in Timely Afforestation: The state highlighted logistical challenges, including difficult terrain, adverse climatic conditions, and administrative hurdles, which contributed to delays in executing compensatory afforestation projects. Efforts are reportedly underway to streamline processes and expedite afforestation activities.

Court’s Observations and Directions:

The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the submissions and the CAG report, expressed grave concern over the alleged misutilization of CAMPA funds and the apparent lapses in financial management. The bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih, observed that the diversion of funds meant for enhancing green cover to non-admissible activities undermines the core objectives of CAMPA.

The Court issued the following directives:

• Affidavit Submission by Chief Secretary: The Chief Secretary of Uttarakhand is instructed to file a comprehensive affidavit addressing the concerns raised, particularly focusing on the utilization of CAMPA funds for non-admissible activities and the delay in depositing the accrued interest. This affidavit is to be submitted by the next hearing date.
• Personal Appearance Warning: The Court cautioned that if the affidavit does not satisfactorily address the issues highlighted, the Chief Secretary may be summoned to appear in person before the Court on the subsequent date.
• Review of Afforestation Delays: The Court directed the state to provide detailed explanations for the significant delays in implementing compensatory afforestation projects and to outline measures being adopted to prevent such delays in the future.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores the critical importance of adhering to the intended purpose of environmental funds like CAMPA. The alleged diversion of these funds for unauthorized expenditures not only contravenes legal mandates but also hampers efforts to mitigate environmental degradation. The forthcoming affidavit from the Uttarakhand Chief Secretary is anticipated to shed light on these issues and pave the way for corrective actions to ensure that CAMPA funds are utilized effectively for their designated purpose—enhancing India’s forest cover.