PANAJI
The Goa government strongly contended before the Supreme Court alleging that the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) while recommending tiger reserve in the State, acted beyond the scope of authority granted to it by the apex court. The Court has listed the matter for further hearing on February 16.
In its submissions, the State argued that the CEC “enlarged the scope of its enquiry” and proceeded well beyond the mandate laid down in the Supreme Court’s order dated September 8, 2025.
The government maintained that the CEC was expected to conduct a limited and objective examination, but instead issued what were effectively directions to notify a tiger reserve-an action it claims the committee had no authority to take.
“Under the guise of making recommendations, the CEC has issued directions to the petitioners to notify a tiger reserve for areas identified in the report,” the State said, adding that such directions “clearly fall outside the scope of the authority vested in the CEC by this Court.”
The State government clarified that the specific issue referred to the CEC was whether, based on prevailing facts and circumstances, the Cotigao–Mhadei forest complex -- comprising five protected areas --ought to be notified as a tiger reserve under Section 38-V(1) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
These protected areas include the Mhadei Wildlife Sanctuary, Bhagwan Mahavir Wildlife Sanctuary, Bhagwan Mahavir National Park, Netravali Wildlife Sanctuary, and Cotigao Wildlife Sanctuary.
However, the State contended that instead of first examining the existence and status of the tiger population in the region, the CEC focused disproportionately on the presence of local inhabitants. The report, Goa argued, proceeds on an “erroneous premise” that the declaration of a tiger reserve is a foregone conclusion.
“The report treats the notification of a tiger reserve as inevitable and limits its examination to identification of areas and relocation of inhabitants,” the government submitted, stating that this approach fundamentally misconstrues the Supreme Court’s reference.
According to the State, the threshold question-whether a tiger reserve should be notified at all-was bypassed entirely. “On this ground alone, the report is vitiated by a clear excess of jurisdiction,” the submission said.
The Apex Court, during its hearing held on January 27, has granted time till February 16, to the petitioner Goa Foundation to submit their say on the government affidavit as well as on CEC findings.
