LAND REGULATION

FOREST AND WILDLIFE

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

Pre- colonial Period

FOREST ACT OF 1865 - First forest act of India recognized two types of forests i.e.
‘Reserved forests’ where government had the sole right of extracting timbers and ‘Protected
forests’ where common people had the right of entry and collection of forest materials they
needed
FOREST ACT 1878 - This forest act published under William Schlich recognized three types
of forests e.g. ‘Reserved forest’, ‘Protected forest’ and ‘Village forest’. Certain activities like
trespassing and cattle grazing were regarded prohibited within the reserved and protected
forests and fines and imprisonment were imposed on the offenders.
FOREST POLICY OF 1894
The endorsements of Dr. Voelcar were treated as the first forest policy in British India. It
included four categories of forests: a) Forests that deserve protection on physical and
climatic ground. b) Timber forests mainly meant for revenue earning by government. C)
Minor forests whose products were of lesser significance to government and d) Forest
pasture lands.

FOREST ACT 1927 - This act practically gave the forest department monopoly on rights
over the forest resources of the country and denied the same to all others. The forest officers
were provided with such an enormous power of decision making that they could change the
physical setup of the forest by deflecting the river courses within their territory. Activities
like entering the forest, cattle grazing, collection of lesser forest products; even fishing from
the water bodies within the forest became prohibited and punishable offence under law. The
offenders can be arrested, by the provision of this law, without warrant and can be detained
up to one month without producing any charge sheet.
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS

The latest and most conspicuous one is the ‘Scheduled tribes and other traditional forest
dwellers (recognition of forest rights) act of 2006.

FOREST POLICY OF 1952

This policy was based on paramount national needs and emphasized the claims of the
communities living in and around the forests should override national interests. Rising
finance from the forest lands was given more importance than securing the rights of the
forest dwelling communities.
This provision was banished in the national forest policy of 1952. Thus, the new policy in
essence became an extension of the colonial policy that only pays interest in making profit
from the forests.
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS

FOREST CONSERVATION ACT, 1980

The Forest Conservation Act of 1980 (FCA) can be seen as a single biggest legislative initiative in
Indian history to slow deforestation caused by the conversion of forestlands to non-forest purposes.
Under this Act, no State Government can authorize such conversion without securing Central
Government’s approval. Note that the FCA does not itself ban any non-forest activity or the DE
reservation of forest land. What the law says is that any such non-forest activity requires that the
permission of the Central Government be secured for such actions. The Act has been given credit by
some for slowing the rate.
of deforestation in India, in part by providing a defense against political pressures –where the State
Governments may be particularly vulnerable - for converting forest areas to other uses
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS
FOREST POLICY 1988
Forest department came out of the Ministry of agriculture in 1985 and became part of the newly formed
Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF). A new forest policy was announced in 1988 that showed,
for the first time; shift in viewpoint of the policy makers regarding the utilization and management of
forest resources.
1. Keeping up the natural heritage of the country and preserving the bio-diversity was given ardent
importance
2. Rights of the poor people living at forest fringes were recognized by stating the role of fuel wood,
fodder, minor forest products and small timbers in sustaining their life.
3. More precisely, the new policy sought to include those people in restoration and maintenance of
forests.
Diversion of forest lands to other purposes was restricted with farm rigidity and employment generation
from the forests for the local people was emphasized to stop forest destruction by shifting cultivation or
lumbering.
There is still a top-heavy system of planning exist in decision making process regarding conservation
and utilization of forest resources where meaningful participation of local people is still absent or in a
more true sense, are ignored.
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS

FOREST RIGHTS ACT 2006

‘The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Rights) Act’
Instead of lending selected privileges, for the first time, forest dwellers were given the
‘rights’ over resources like land, water, tree etc. that traditionally belonged to them for
centuries but denied the same by the Indian Government till the date of enactment of FRA.
This act is aimed at “eradicating the historical injustice” made by the hegemonic people to
the forest dwelling communities of the country, most of them being the members of
scheduled caste and scheduled tribe families.
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS

PROVISIONS OF FOREST RIGHTS ACT 2006

1. Settlements of rights on land - people dwelling on forest lands for more than thirty years will
get lawful right over the parcel of land he/she possesses. Their existence was depended on the
mercy of the forest officials. Moreover, they were treated as ‘encroachers’ thus cannot sell their
harvest to government agencies. FRA can solve this misery for good.
2. Recording of holdings of Individual names - Recording of residential plots and farmlands in
individual’s name will enable them to access different beneficial schemes offered by the
central and state governments including land development, subsidized homes and food grain
procurement programs. It means a lot for the forest people. First of all, it is a social
recognition, from landless to landlord. Secondly, it has a great deal of economic importance.
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS
3. Rights of communities over Forest - 2006 offers rights of forest lands to traditional societies
those have lived in harmony with their forests from a distant past. For the people, to whom forest
is an integral part of life, it is recognition of their livelihood. Forests may be shared by two or
more communities, or a particular community may reserve sole right over a particular stretch of
forest.
This enables them to control and manage the forest resources in such way that the community can
be benefited most. It will also obliterate the supremacy of the forest department and dependency
of forest dwellers over the department in planning and managing their resources will be reduced in
a justified manner.
4. People’s Consent for conversion of land - This is commonly regarded as ‘the consent clause’.
Before enactment of FRA, people living in forest lands had no scope to challenge their eviction
from those lands before the court of law. Forest Department had the sole authority to establish and
evict forest villages as per their priority. Moreover, if the forest land was converted into mines,
roads, railroads or reservoirs, the inhabitants were evicted without compensation and relocation.
FRA enables the forest dwellers to bargain with the government or the private entrepreneur for
their rehabilitation and compensation
POST INDEPENDENCE
FOREST POLICES AND ACTS

5. Conservation of Village status - As per FRA, all forest villages must be converted to
revenue villages. This will connect those marginal villages to the mainstream of
infrastructure development. It will bring the provisions of ‘Pradhanmantri Gram Sadak
Yojona’ to the tribal villages located inside the forests. Other facilities include access to grid
power, irrigational facilities, job card under ‘Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment
Guaranty Act’ (MoNREGA) etc.
THE POLICY AND PRACTICE

A claim of forest right has to pass three hierarchical levels before getting
recorded. As per recommendation of the Central Government, each district
authority has formed three-tiered structure comprised of Gram Sabha Level
Committee (GSLC), SubDivision Level Committee (SDLC) and District
Level Committee (DLC). An empowered group called State Level
Monitoring Committee (SLMC) is also set to co-ordinate interdistrict issues
regarding recognition and vesting of forest rights. The GSLC is comprised of
village representatives of the Panchayati Raj system and the officials from
state forest department and Land and Land revenue department
 SECTION 2 – FOREST (CONSERVATION) ACT 1980

Section 2: Restriction on the de - reservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purpose -
Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force in a State, no State
Government or other authority shall make except with the prior approval of the Central Government, any
order directing:
i) that any reserved forest (within the meaning of the express `reserved forest' in any law for the time
being in force in that State) or any portion thereof, shall cease to be reserved;
ii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be used for any non-forest purposes;
iii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be assigned by way of lease or otherwise to any
private person or to any authority, corporation, agency or any other
organization not owned, Managed or controlled by Government;
iv) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be cleared of trees which have grown naturally in that
land or portion for the purpose of using it for reforestation.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

Felling of Trees - refers to the intentional cutting down or removal of trees from standing position. This
process is typically carried out for various purposes, including, Timber harvesting, land clearance, forest
management, Hazards Mitigation , ecological restoration. Etc..

1. T.N Godavarman Vs Union of India – defined the term ‘Forest’ which means all statutory recognized
forest and the ‘forest land’ includes forest as week as any area recorded as forest in the government
records.
ISSUE –
• Whether the new interpretation of section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act is violative of the principles of
environmental Law?
• Whether the usage of the timber for commercial purpose is justified?
.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

FACTS OF THE CASE

• This case is also known as the Forest Case. The case challenged the constitutional validity of the Forest
Conservation Act of 1980.
• In 1995, T.N. Godavarman, a lawyer and environmentalist, initiated a writ petition in the Indian Supreme
Court to protect the Nilgiris forest area from illegal logging activities that were causing significant damage.
• The main objective of this lawsuit was to conserve and safeguard the forest. Subsequently, a
comprehensive hearing was conducted to address the National Forest Policy, which was considered crucial
for dealing with related issues.
• The case pertained to the protection and conservation of India’s forests, and the Court issued orders to
regulate forest activities, such as appointing a committee to monitor and regulate forest activities,
suspending logging and mining operations, and establishing guidelines for forest conservation and
management.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

JUDGEMNET
• On December 12, 1996, Chief Justice J.S. Verma issued an interim order directing the cessation of tree-cutting and
non-forest service development activities in forested areas across the country.
• The Court has noted that the land belongs to the defendant, and he has full rights over his property or premises,
although the activity that was occurring there was illegal.
• According to the Forest (Conservation), Act of 1980, deforestation of plantations without the prior permission of the
central government or the forest department of the concerned district or area was considered to be illegal whether the
property belonged to the government or a private individual.
• In addition to the aforementioned ruling, the Court also noted that to protect biodiversity and retain the right ecological
balance, there should be a complete prohibition on all tree-cutting without permission. No matter whether it is
necessary for the railways, roads, or rivers, everyone must follow the rules for tree cutting and falling.
• The state government is allowed to cut down trees, provided that appropriate precautions are taken to maintain the
proper ecological balance. No other private person was permitted to remove the trees.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

2. Orrisa Mining Corporation V/s Ministry of Environment and Forests –

FACTS OF THE CASE
• The Dongria Kondh was a tribal community that inhabited the Niyamgiri Hills. The hills were sacred to the Dongria Kondh, and
they believed that Niyam Raja, their god, resided there.
• A mining project was proposed for the region. The proposed mining project would have involved the diversion of 660.749
hectares of forest land in the Niyamgiri Hills.
• The project would have also had a significant impact on the Dongria Kondh’s way of life.
• The Dongria Kondh were dependent on the forest for their livelihood, and the project would have displaced them from their
traditional lands.
• The Orissa Mining Corporation (OMC) applied to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) for permission to mine
bauxite in the Niyamgiri Hills in Orissa.
• The MoEF granted stage I clearance for the project, but withheld stage II clearance pending an assessment of the impact of the
project on the Dongria Kondh.
• The Dongria Kondh filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the grant of stage I clearance.
• The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Dongria Kondh and ordered the MoEF t0 consult the Gram Sabha, the village council of
the Dongria Kondh, before granting stage II clearance.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

2. Orrisa Mining Corporation V/s Ministry of Environment and Forests –

ISSUES
• Whether the decision to reject environmental clearance for the construction of a mine
because of its impact on indigenous tribes is lawful.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

JUDGMENT –
• The Court upheld the rejection on the basis that some places can – and must – be off
limits to mining activities.
• The Court considered the entitlement of tribal people to land which is owned by the
company. However, the Court went on to clarify that the State holds the natural resources
as a trustee of the people; as such, local populations must give consent to any efforts to
extract these resources. Following a series of 12 village consultations regarding the
Vedanta project, the Dongria unanimously rejected the proposal.
• The Court noted that agriculture was the only source of livelihood for the tribes
concerned, apart from the collection and sale of minor forest produce to supplement their
income
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

3. Samatha v/s State of Andhra Pradesh –

FACTS OF THE CASE
• Borra reserved forest consisting of 14 villages is a tribal area of Vishakhapatnam in
Andhra Pradesh. The state government gave that land on lease to non-tribal peoples for
mining.
• Appellant filed a case against the power of the government of transferring tribal land to
non-tribal peoples for mining. High Court dismissed the writ petition and states that
statutes do not prohibit the government to leases land for mining purposes to non-tribal
peoples, Hence judgement comes in the favor of the state.
• Appellants filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

3. Samatha v/s State of Andhra Pradesh –

ISSUES –
1. Whether the government has the power to transfer the land in the scheduled area to a non-tribal.
2. Whether the lease are in the violation of Environment Act, 1986.
3. Whether the government has the power to grant mining leases to non-tribal .

JUDGMENT
• The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and held that granting a mining lease is a violation of the Andhra
Pradesh Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation , 1959
• The State Government was ordered to stop all the industry doing mining work and the rule enacted that the state government cannot
decide it, the sate must first discuss it with the central government
• Court also held that 20% of the net profit will be reserved for tribal peoples and all the land leased by the government or private
agencies is null and void. Therefore, judgment comes in the favor of the Tribal community .
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

5. K M Chinappa v Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 724

• Kudremukh, a biodiversity hotspot, received its first notification of being designated as a National Park in 1987. This subjected the area to
the Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972, which prohibits any non-forestry operations, including mining, within a protected area. Because of the
lease granted two decades before, the company was able to continue operations until 1999.
• In 1969, KIOCL was granted authorization and a 30-year lease to take over 3703 hectares of forest land in the western ghats of southern
Karnataka in order to mine iron ore for export. The company’s lease ended on July 25, 1999, but activities continued. The company
continued its mining operations while operating under a “temporary working authorization” provided by the Ministry of Environment and
Forests
• Even though the lease was about to expire, iron ore was still being collected from Kudremukh’s shola-grassland heart. K M Chinnappa, a
retired Forest Officer and Trustee of the NGO Wildlife, filed an Interlocutory Application (IA) with the Supreme Court in 2001 when there
appeared to be no indication that the company would stop mining and when appeals to the government to not renew the lease were
unsuccessful
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

ISSUES
1. Whether the appeal should be “dollar friendly” or “Eco- friendly”.
2. Whether to direct KIOCL to stop contaminating the Bhadra River as a result of open-pit mining.
3. Whether KIOCL should be prosecuted for illegal forest encroachment and forest devastation in the
Kudremukh National Park.
4. Whether to stop KIOCL from constructing a new slurry pipeline through the forest of National Park .
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

JUDGMENT
• Role of environmental law- the court stated that environmental laws are designed to protect and improve
the natural environment. These laws aims to prevent activities that could harm the environment. These
laws aim to prevent activities that could harm the environment. Given the extensive environmental
damages caused by industrial activities over the years, countries around the world are enhancing their
environmental regulations.
• Mining lease renewal – in this specific case, a company had a mining lease in the Kudremukh National
Park area and they applied to renew this lease. The Forest Advisory Committee, which evaluates such
proposals, decided to allow the mining to continue until the end of 2005. they made this decision based on
the condition that all the accessible ore in the mining area would be exhausted by then and the company
would follow certain environmental guidelines.
• The court agreed with the forestry advisory committee’s recommendation, allowing mining to continue
with specific conditions aimed at minimizing environmental damage. This decision was still subject to the
approval of other environmental recommendations which weren’t specified in detail
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

JUDGMENT
The company faced multiple legal actions due to alleged violations of environmental and other laws. The
company was fined 130 crores by the Comptroller and Auditor General for breaking forest laws.

* Although this penalty was supported by the State Public Accounts Committee, the Karnataka government
hasn’t collected the fine or taken step to evict the company from the forest area.
 ROLE OF JUDICIARY

4. UOI and Ors Vs Kamath Holiday Resort

FACTS OF THE CASE
• Collector of the Union Territory, Daman, as a step towards promoting tourism leased out a site in the
reserved forest area to the respondent for putting up a snack Bar and a restaurant to cater to the needs of
tourists visiting the forest.
• It was the Conservator of Forests who raked up the matter and objected to the grant of such lease affecting
the reserve forest. The lease was for a period of five years, renewable in terms.
• The objection of the Conservator of Forests was legal in as much as there was restriction on the de-
reservation of forest of use of forest land for non-forest purposes, as envisaged under Section 2 of the
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
 FOREST LIFE
ROLE OF JUDICIARY

INDIAN HANDICRAFTS EMPORIUM VS. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 2003 SC 3240

the appellants filed a writ before the Delhi high court challenging the 1986 and 1991 amendments to
the wildlife protection Act 1972.
The HC Stayed the operation of the act, but later vacated the stay and upheld the vires of the Act

The appellants challenged the constitutionality of the Act before the SC of India.
 FOREST LIFE
ROLE OF JUDICIARY

Facts
1. The appellants were engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of articles made of ivory.
They had imported ivory from Africa between 1971 and 1986 and were in possession of 756 kg of
ivory articles.
2. In 1977, the Indian elephant was brought within the purview of the wildlife protection Act. The
export of ivory was also banned that same year.
3. By 1986 amendment, the wildlife restricted the trade or commerce of wild animals, animal articles
and trophies.
4. In 1991 amendment to the wildlife protection Act imposed a total ban on the trade of imported
ivory and provided a six month period for the disposal of all stocks of ivory held.
 FOREST LIFE
ROLE OF JUDICIARY

HELD

The Supreme court ruled against the appellant considering that the prohibition on ivory trade is
reasonable, given the dangerousness of that trades to the ecology.
In balancing the direct impact on the fundamental right to property against the greater public and
social interest of the general public,
The SC further held that the right to property is a human right and constitutional right but not a
fundamental right and that the control of property short of depravation does not entail payment of
compensation.