It is important to mentlon here that in the case brought before the Commission by Ms. Subhashini Ali, negligence was Involved on the part of the factory owner. In such cases, exemplary compensation and damages are to be awarded to the victims. The Supreme Court of India has modified the English rule of strict liability in M.C. Mehta vs. UOI (AIR 1987 S.C. 1087) and has laid down the concept of 'absolute liability' in the case of industrial hazards, even though there might not have been any negligence on the part of the enterprise owner. By providing additional relief and ordering the expeditious criminal trial of the culprit8, the Commission has kept in mind the constitutional obllgatlons of the State and also the UN Declaration on the Environment and Developments. 22. Healthy Environment andTraditional Rights of TLlbalr :Hararrment:and Torture of lkibalr by Forest Offlclalr : Uttar Pradesh (Case No.14971124/97-98) A complaint received by the Commission alleged that the Van gujjars living in the forest area which fell under the proposed Rajaji National Park, Dehradun were being harassed and tortured by the directors and staffmembers of the park. The complainant maintained that the tribals were not allowed to fetch fodder for their animals, sdl the milk or have access to medical aM as an ambulance was not being allowed into the area and that this had resulted in loss of human Ilfe. The complainant further alleged that the notification for the establishment of the National Park was isoued in contravention of the provisions of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. The efforts of forest officials were directed to seek forcible eviction of guljars and, in a few cases, they were cheated in order to obtain declarations that, in exchange for two acres of land, they were ready to leave the forest. In another complaint received from the counsel of the complainant, similar facts about the ambulance not being allowed entry into the forest and the denial of medical facilities were alleged. The Commission issued a notice to the Chief Secretary, U.P. A report by the Chief Conservator of Forests was submitted in which all allegetbns were denied and a copy of rehabilitation pollcy for gujlars was enclosed. It was stated in the report that gujjars were, in fact, disturbing the system by indiscriminate felling of trees in the forest. A reference was made to writ petition 79/89 filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had directed speedy settlement of guBars outside the Rajaji National Park. The settlement process had already started and 62 families were resettled in Pathri region of Haridwar. In accordance with the salient features of that project, each gujjar family was entitled to be given two acres of land and Rs. 10,000/- for transporting the building materials. Road construction, drinking water, schools, ambulances transport and other facilities were envisaged in the rehabilitation project. It was also brought to the notice of the Commission that Writ Petition No. 202/95 was pending before the Supreme Court In which different acts relatingto the conservationof forests were to be examined. The Commission sent a copy of the report of the Chief Conservator of