States must follow definition of ‘forest’ laid out in 1996 judgement, says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday told states and Union Territories to follow the definition of “forest” that has been mentioned in a 1996 judgement, reported Live Law.

The bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud ordered that until the process of identifying forest land as per new rules is completed, states and Union Territories must go by the definition of “forest” laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of TN Godavarman Thirumalpad vs Union of India.

In the 1996 judgement, the court held that a deemed forest would not only include “forests” as understood by the dictionary meaning of the word – a large area with significant tree cover – but also any areas recorded as forests in government records, irrespective of ownership.

The judgement has protected vast tracts of eco-sensitive and Adivasi lands under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, even if they are not formally classified as a “forest” in revenue records.

The Supreme Court was on Monday hearing petitions challenging the amendments made to the Forest Conservation Act in 2023. The petitioners have contended that the amended law narrows down the definition of “forest” mentioned in the 1996 judgement.

The petitioners also told the court that as per the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, state governments and Union Territory administrations have...

Read more