The Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud including Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra issued this interim order amidst concerns that the 2023 amendments in Forest (Conservation) Act could potentially lead to the declassification of over 1.97 lakh square kilometers of forest land.
On Monday the Supreme Court has mandated that its prior permission is essential before establishing any zoo or safari within forest areas. This decree is part of a broader scrutiny into the amendments made to the Forest (Conservation) Act 2023, with the apex court directing all states and union territories to furnish details regarding their forest lands by March 31, as per the criteria established in a pivotal 1996 decision.
Also Read- Supreme Court Overturns Judgment Issued Post-Retirement By High Court Judge (lawchakra.in)
The bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud including Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra issued this interim order amidst concerns that the 2023 amendments could potentially lead to the declassification of over 1.97 lakh square kilometers of forest land, previously safeguarded under the Supreme Court’s definition of “forest” in the landmark TN Godavarman case. The court’s directive aims to ensure that any proposal for zoos or safaris, as mentioned in the Wild Life (Protection) Act of 1972 and owned by the government or any authority, will not receive final approval without the Supreme Court’s explicit consent.
“We issue an interim order to the effect that any proposal for setting up a zoo or safari referred to in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, owned by government or any authority in forest area other than protected areas, shall not be finally approved save and except the final approval of this Court,”
the bench said.
The Supreme Court’s intervention comes in response to petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the recent amendments to the Forest Conservation Act, which relax provisions against developmental activities in forest areas. Advocates for the petitioners, including Prashant Bhushan, highlighted the risk of nearly 2 lakh square kilometers of forest land being removed from the protection of the Forest Conservation Act due to these amendments. The court echoed these concerns, stating,
“This cannot be allowed to go on. Almost 2 lakh square kilometers of forest land will be declassified.”
The Court also said,
“Where any proposal (for zoo or safari) is sought to be implemented, the Union government or the competent authority shall move this Court.”
However, the Central government, represented by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, assured that the intention behind the amendments was not to exclude but to include and document all forest lands, thereby bringing them under the Act’s protection. The Chief Justice remarked on the government’s motive, emphasizing the goal of documenting rather than declassifying forests.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is a critical step in safeguarding India’s forests against unchecked development, ensuring that any new zoos or safaris within these precious ecosystems are subjected to rigorous judicial scrutiny. This decision not only protects the country’s forest lands but also emphasizes the importance of maintaining ecological balance and biodiversity. By requiring states and union territories to identify and report their forest lands, the Supreme Court aims to create a comprehensive and digitized record that will aid in the effective management and conservation of India’s natural heritage.
This landmark order reflects the judiciary’s commitment to environmental conservation and sets a precedent for future governance of forest lands, ensuring that development projects like zoos and safaris are carefully evaluated for their environmental impact before receiving approval. The Supreme Court’s stance underscores the critical balance between development and conservation, highlighting the need for meticulous planning and judicial oversight in the utilization of forest areas.
In October last year, the Court entertained the first petition challenging the amended Act, filed by a group of 13 retired bureaucrats. They argued that allowing commercial activity in forests, including the establishment of permanent structures, access roads, power transmission lines, and other supporting infrastructure for zoos and safaris, would “sound the death knell of forests in India.” The petition further stated,
“Each diversion of land, without any cumulative ceiling being prescribed across the country, will pockmark our forests with cancerously growing deforested islands and fragment them, causing enormous ecological loss.”
The petitions also raised concerns about categorizing zoos and safaris as non-forestry activities, as well as the granting of exemptions for the establishment of security infrastructure and projects deemed strategically important near border areas, all within forest land.
Case Details : Ashok Kumar Sharma, IFS (Retd) & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1164 of 2023
