LANDMARK CASE

Centre for Environmental Law, WWF India v. Union of India (Asiatic Lion)

(2013) 8 SCC 234 · Supreme Court of India · Environmental law

At a glance

Citation: (2013) 8 SCC 234
Court: Supreme Court of India
Area of law: Environmental law
In one line: Yes. Relocation was ordered to protect the species from a single catastrophe, applying an eco centric approach.

1 Facts

Gujarat resisted relocating some Asiatic lions from Gir to Kuno in Madhya Pradesh.

2 Issue

Should a second home for lions be created?

3 What the court decided

Yes. Relocation was ordered to protect the species from a single catastrophe, applying an eco centric approach.

4 Why it matters

It adopted an eco centric view of conservation.

5 Think about it

What is the difference between anthropocentric and eco centric approaches?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Environmental law

A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu (1999) 2 SCC 718
Arjun Gopal v. Union of India (2017) 1 SCC 412
Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi (2001) 6 SCC 496
Indian Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India (1996) 3 SCC 212
Lafarge Umiam Mining v. Union of India (2011) 7 SCC 338
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997) 1 SCC 388

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.