Meghalaya HC Closes Suo Motu PIL To Protect Wetlands In State After Noting None Of The Sites Fell Under Ramsar Convention

The Meghalaya High Court on April 29 (Tuesday) closed a PIL suo moto PIL to ensure that the Ramsar Convention wetland sites within the State are properly maintained and ensured, after accepting report by the Chief Conservator of Forests of the State Government which states that none of the wetlands in the State qualify as a Ramsar site.

The said PIL was registered in pursuance of Supreme Court's direction dated December 11, 2024 in Writ Petition (C) No. 304 of 2018, requesting all High Courts to initiate litigation for the purpose of “ground truthing” of wetlands and identification of Ramsar sites amongst those waterbodies, in the State.

To summarise, the wetlands, if any, situated in the State had to be identified, maintained and preserved as they were considered to be of great heritage value of international importance.

A division bench of Chief Justice I.P. Mukerji and Justice W. Diengdoh in its order took note of the submission of the Advocate General that not all waterbodies can be categorised as Ramsar sites and waterbodies of a particular minimum area, depth, unique nature, characteristics and its natural habitat qualify as Ramsar sites.

“The purpose of the Supreme Court order was to ensure that suitable orders were passed by a High Court upon the State for identification, preservation and maintenance of these waterbodies in accordance with the resolution taken in the Ramsar Convention,” the order notes. 

The Advocate General filed a report dated April, 29 prepared by the Chief Conservator of Forests (Administration), Department of Forests and Environment of the State government.

Based on the above-mentioned report, the Advocate General submitted that all categories of wetlands comprising of 66 lakes/ponds, 1 oxbow/cut off meander, 6 riverine wetlands, 18 waterlogged bodies, 100 river/streams, 9 reservoirs/barrages and 25 tanks/ponds had been inspected by the Meghalaya State Wetland Authority and the personnel of the Chief Conservator of Forests (Administration), Department of Forests and Environment of the State government.

"“Ground truthing” of these wetlands had been completed. It is opined in the report by the Chief Conservator of Forests of the State government that none of the above wetlands qualify as a Ramsar site. The said report is accepted and taken on record," the court said.

“Although there is no direction to this effect, we direct the Registrar General of this Court to affirm an affidavit in the said writ petition before the Supreme Court on behalf of the State of Meghalaya and this Court stating the above steps which have been taken in compliance with its said order, including all orders passed by this Court and the said report dated 29th April, 2025 of the State. The said affidavit should only be filed after obtaining appropriate leave from the highest court,” the Court directed.

Accordingly, the Court disposed of the PIL.

Case Title: Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya v. State of Meghalaya

Case No.: PIL No. 2 of 2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order