Will Kancha Gachibowli intervention by the Supreme Court herald a new era in Forest Conservation ?
Dr VK Bahuguna
April 22, 2025
(The writer is former Director-General & Chancellor of ICFRE, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change)
The Supreme Court of India on 12th December 1996 in its epoch-making order on TN Godavarman Thirumullapad versus Union of India and others had set into motion a marvelous judicial intervention on forest conservation in the country and rest is the history of innumerable number of orders in correcting the several wrong decisions affecting forest and wildlife conservation in the country. After 29 years of experience of judicial intervention in yet another suo motu interventionon 3rd April 2025, thanks to the studentsof the Hyderabad University and mediatheSupreme Court Bench headed by Justice B.R. Gavai and Augustine George Masih helped by Senior Advocate K Parmeshwar(the amicus curiae, in the TN Godavarman forest cases, who alerted the court to media reports about the deforestation).
The Bench acted swiftly, expressing shock at the scale of the tree felling and the use of heavy machinery to clear approximately 100 acres in just a few days, directed the Registrar General of Andhra High Court to visit the site of felling of trees and submit the report same day in the afternoon of 3rd April itself. The Registrar General after visiting the site in the afternoon sent the report and then the Bench in a very forthright acerbic tone warned the state Chief Secretary and senior bureaucrats of putting them on jail in the same location by constructing a temporary jail.The court comments are scathing for the Telangana governments but in favour of Trees, Wildlife and natural Environment which are part of our ecosystem but cannot speak and protest yet they are the resource base for human survival.
The Court heard the case again on 16th April and again warned the Chief Secretary and other officers of sending them to imprisonment for felling trees over 100 acre if the damage was not addressed through a restoration plan and directed the Telangana government to submit the same in next four weeks. While hearing the case the Bench reiterated that 1996 Supreme Court order is sacrosanct in defining what constitute forests irrespective of status of the land. The Bench while reiterating its warning the officers of state directed the state Chief Wildlife Warden to ensure protection to wildlife and asked for restoration plan for the 100 acre felled forestsand at the same time stating that high rise buildings cannot be made in the company of wildlife. It made it clear that the state government had to take permission for felling of all kinds of trees be it recorded forests or otherwise if it comes under the purview of deemed forests as outlined in the 1996 order of the Supreme Court.
So the die has been cast so far as definition of forest is concerned coming as it came after theForest Conservation Amendment Act was passed by the Parliament in 2023.The amendment primarily clarifies the scope of forest land and simplify procedures for certain activities.The amendment clarifies that forest land includes areas notified under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, or recorded in government records as forest land as on the 1980 Act's enforcement date. The Act exempts certain types of land from its purview, such as land within 100 km of India's border needed for national security projects, small roadside amenities, and public roads leading to a habitation. Now the observations of the Supreme Court Bench had restored the 1996 order of the Supreme Court and hence all states are duty bound to obtain the permission for non- forest use of the deemed forest land.
Now let us examine the context of such virulent observations of sending state officers in jail by the Apex Court on 3rd April as well as reiterating it on 16th April 2025. After this the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has also sought a report from Telangana government. It is a stark fact that the forests of the country are not in good shape and the most important reason is the public apathy for conservation of forests at all level be in public at large, administrative or political leaders of all hues though they keep tom-toming on solemn occasions and provide lip service to the forests, bio-diversity and river systems. This is quite revealed from the way our governments functionin centre as well as state level. We need to look at the state of forest report 2023 which clearly brought about that more than 37% of tree cover out of the 82 million ha of forest and tree cover is created by the farmers of the country and it is worth pondering the fate of forest related bio-diversity on these farmers land. Another grim reminder is the lack of adequate regeneration in recorded forests as only 48 % of the forests areas have adequate regeneration. The degradation is also increasing as 46,000 ha of recorded forests have near completely lost the tree cover.
There is need that the IAS and IFS officers sitting in the Ministry decide to change this matrix of degradation and work sincerely to ensure a policy framework for better forest and bio-diversity management. This writer is very forthright in asking the forest service mandarins to get over the clique syndrome and speak in a single voice for the trees, wild animals and our rivers and rivulets. The professionalism these days is seen more in acquiescence and lobbying than in standing for the real cause. It is because of this the Supreme Court Bench had made these sarcastic comments and it is time now that the officers work honestly and balance the need of development with conservation and once they stand firm and truthful than the political masters shall follow. There is a need for increasing the budget of forestry sector and empowerment of communities under the Joint Forest Management Programme. But one of the biggest cause of deforestation is the lop sided and open ended implementation of Forest Right Act 2006 by the Tribal Affairs Ministry who along with foreign funded NGOs and ‘Jhola chhap‘social activist and phoney foresters portray the romantic vision of promoting encroachments on forest land. They must desist or must be sidelined by the government and asked to work to make the land so far allotted to tribals productive so that their socio-economic status improves. It is hoped that this intervention of Apex Court will force all concern to change track.
(Tripurainfo)
more articles...