Summary
In petitions by displaced tea-estate workers of the former Bombay Burma Trading Corporation estate at Singampatti, now within the Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, the Supreme Court took up the question of forest restoration that the Madras High Court had left inconclusive and, as an interim measure, directed the Central Empowered Committee to survey the entire Agasthyamalai landscape for encroachments and non-forestry activities and to recommend restoration measures within twelve weeks; the workers' rehabilitation claims were deferred.
Issues
- Whether the Court should take up the removal of encroachments and the restoration of reserved forests, tiger habitats and wildlife sanctuaries in the Agasthyamalai landscape, which the High Court left inconclusive.
- What interim directions are required for a scientific survey of the landscape and the identification of encroachments and non-forestry activities.
- The claims of the erstwhile tea estate workers to employment, rehabilitation and compensation (deferred).
Provisions considered
- Section 2, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980Noted from the status report of the Wildlife Warden that prior approval of the Government of India is required before forest land is assigned by lease or otherwise to any private person or body for non-forestry purposes; the CEC was directed to report all non-forestry activities contrary to this Act. (¶¶ 13, 27)
- Act generally (sanctuary, tiger reserve and core critical tiger habitat notifications), Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972The estate area had been notified as a wildlife sanctuary and tiger reserve under the Act and declared a core critical tiger habitat; the CEC was directed to report non-forestry activities contrary to the Act and to recommend measures for restoring tiger habitats and other wildlife reserves. (¶¶ 1, 9, 13, 27, 29)
- Section 16, Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882The status report recorded that 22,979.19 hectares, including the 3,388.78 hectares leased to BBTCL, had been declared reserved forest under Section 16 after following due process and considering claims under the Act; the Court proceeded on that footing. (¶ 13)
Held
- Forests are the lungs of the ecosystem; India's forest cover of about 21.76% is inadequate and some 13,000 sq. km of forest is under encroachment, and this Court, in the continuing mandamus in T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad and in State of Telangana v. Mohd. Abdul Qasim, has repeatedly directed that encroachments be removed and that an ecocentric rather than anthropocentric approach be adopted. The Court therefore considered it necessary to take up the restoration issue which the High Court left inconclusive. (¶¶ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
- Accepting the amicus curiae's submission that the directions of the Madras High Court in Bombay Burma Trading Corporation v. State of Tamil Nadu (2018) had lost their edge and that meaningful restoration first requires a scientific demarcation of forest boundaries, the Court directed the Central Empowered Committee, as an interim measure, to survey the entire Agasthyamalai landscape, including the Periyar Tiger Reserve and the Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife Sanctuaries, and to report all non-forestry activities carried on contrary to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. (¶¶ 16, 21, 22, 23, 27)
- The CEC must also furnish comparative data on the earlier and present forest cover to gauge depletion, and recommend measures for restoring the reserved forests, tiger habitats, elephant corridors and other sanctuaries, employing remote-sensing satellite imagery and geo-mapping to expedite the survey; the district, police and forest officials of the State are responsible for giving it all required assistance. (¶¶ 28, 29, 30)
- No question of law was decided on the workers' claims to rehabilitation, compensation and re-employment; those issues were deferred to a later date. (¶¶ 33, 34)
Result
Directions issued: the CEC to complete the survey of the Agasthyamalai landscape within twelve weeks; matter listed on 15 July 2025 to receive the CEC's report and for further directions; the issues relating to rehabilitation of the tea estate workers to be considered on 22 April 2025.