Thwarting dilution of status of forests

In a recent judgment the Supreme Court rejected the definition of ‘Forests’ in the Forest Conservation (Amended) Act 1980 and directed the government to revert to the older definition of forests terming it “broad and all-encompassing”.

The original Act enacted in 1980 sought to limit infrastructure development activities on forest land.

The Bharatiya Janata Party government had amended 1980 Act in July-August last year limiting legal protections to only those forests which are notified in the Indian Forest Act of 1927 and which find mention in the government records.

The amended Act had evoked widespread opposition from ecologists, environmentalists and naturalists.

They had warned that the new Act, named Van Sanrakashan Evam Samvardhan Adhiniyam will make vast tracts of forests vulnerable as the term ‘Forest’ has vastly variable definitions from state to state.

Several civil society organisations had moved to the Supreme Court seeking intervention to nullify the amended Act. The upholding of the 1996 case definition will protect India’s forests from unprecedented destruction.

The amendment was designed to help vested interests to usurp green tracts for mining and other commercial exploitation.

The amendment had allowed the diversion of forest land for roads, railway lines or strategic linear projects and concerning national security within 100 kilometres of India’s international borders or lines of control without a forest clearance under the Forest (Conversation) Act (FCA) 1980.

While the Mizoram Assembly had passed a resolution against the amendment Act, most of the northeastern states had contended that most of India’s North-east falls in this 100 km range.