Forests, the order of the Supreme Court and the order of rehabilitation project to the complainant, for his response. The complainant reiterated his allegations and, thereafter, the Commission directed a Special Rapporteur to examine the matter. The Special Rapporteur met the complainant and several officers of the Government of Uttar Pradesh. He learnt from them that 62 families were happy with their resettlement and others were ready to move out if2 acrms of land was given to each of them.fhe report disclosed that the number of famllies to be resrttled had increased from 512 to 1390 and that the final notification, as required by law, notifying the Rajaji National Park, had not been issued. The gujjars could not, therefore, be deprived of their traditional rights. The Commission convened a meeting of the concerned parties to find a satisfactory solution of this human problem. The claims of the State and the gujjars wsre In conflict with each other. The State was concerned about the denudation of forests and wanted to protect the forests and the wild life. The gujjars asserted their traditional rights to sustain their livelihood. The Commission accordingly made certain recommendations to protect the interests of the gujjars. For ascertaining whdher the gujjar families were willing to leave the land or not, the setting up of an impartial M y by the Government of UP was recommended. Until gujjar families did not leave, their traditional rights were to be protected and they should not be subjected to any harassment by the b e s t officials. The Commission brought together the complainant and the authorities so that they may understand each othem' problem. For Instance, regarding the grazing and lopping, the forest authorities conceded that these rights of guijars needed to be protected. The Commission directed that the areas where gujjars could take their animals for grazing, outside the National Park, could be ascertained by the authorities. But in any case, no coercive steps were to be taken. It was also pointed out that h e gujjars should not claim unfettered rights to lop the trees; rather, areas should be specified, chosen on the basis of the age and growth of trees, by the authoritles. Considering the very Important aspect of entry of vehicles, including the ambulance, the Commission dlrectedkhat the permission to enter should not be declined and, in rare cases when this is done, h e dasons must be recorded in writing, immediately. The Commissionwas assured by the fore* officials that the entry of the ambulance will be allowed, subject to the condition that one forest official nominated for this purpose should be taken inside the ambulance. The Commiasion was further assured that proper arrangements for giving permission for entry of vehicles would be made at the entry point itself. The complainant had submitted that several gujjars had died due to lack of medical attention as the ambulance was not allowed to enter the forest. These allegations were refuted by the authorities completely. The Commission preferted that the parties should work out their rights in accordance wlth the law applicable to them and decided not to intervene in this matter.