Context:

This editorial is based on the news “Calm assessment: On the extent of ‘deemed forest” which was published in the Hindu. This article highlights the Supreme Court of India’s decision to put a pause on the Centre’s action to amend India’s Forest Conservation Act 1980, that was brought in to check the wanton razing of forests for ‘non-forestry uses’.  

Need for the Centre’s Attempt to Amend the Forest Conservation Act 1980

• A Great Extent of Diversion: According to the Union Government, an estimated four million hectares of forest land had been diverted from 1951-75. 
• Intended to Bring Clarity: As there were large tracts of recorded forest land that had already been put to non-forestry uses, with the permission of State governments. 
• Elimination of Fear: As per Central Government, there is a reluctance among private citizens to cultivate private plantations and orchards, despite their significant ecological benefits, for fear that they would be classified as ‘forest’ and thus render their ownership void. 
• Need for Sustainable Climate Action: India’s ambitions to create a carbon sink of 2.5 billion-3 billion tonnes, to meet its net zero goals, have required forest laws to be “dynamic”.
  • The rules have sought to remove ‘deemed forest,’ from the ambit of protection. 

Provisions of the Forest Conservation Act 1980

• Regulations: Forests could no longer be diverted without adhering to a regulatory mechanism by the Centre. 
  • As a measure of its success, the Centre calculates that from 1981-2022, the average annual diversion of forest had reduced to about 22,000 hectares, or about a tenth of what it was from 1951-75. 
• Applicability: The provisions of this piece of legislation largely applied to forest tracts recognised as such by the India Forest Act, or any other State legislation. 

About the landmark T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Judgment

• Expanded View: It saw the Supreme Court take an expanded view of forest tracts worthy of protection. 
• Must Protected: It said that forests had to be protected irrespective of how they were classified and who owned them. 
• Concept of Deemed Forests: This brought in the concept of ‘deemed forests,’ or tracts that were not officially classified as such in government or revenue records. 
  • States were asked to constitute expert committees to identify such ‘deemed forests.’ 
    • In the 28 years that have passed since the judgement, only a handful of States have constituted such committees or made public the extent of such ‘deemed forests’ within their territories.

Conclusion

Such amendment has triggered a slew of public interest petitions as an assault on the Act’s ambition of forest protection. While a final judgement is pending, the Court’s order to the Centre to compile and make public, by April, States’ efforts at recording the extent of deemed forests is welcome. There is a need to maintain a balance between economical and ecological growth development.

DOWNLOAD PDF