Saranda Sal Forest: Supreme Court Sanctuary Order Not Complied
Why in the news
An editorial highlighted that Jharkhand has not carried out the Supreme Court’s direction to declare part of Saranda a wildlife sanctuary. The time limit ended on 12 February 2026 and the state is leaning towards a review petition instead, pointing to tribal rights, mining and infrastructure needs.
Key facts
- Order date: 13 November 2025; area: 31,468.25 ha (about 314 sq km); legal route: Section 26A, Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
- Time limit: three months, ended 12 February 2026.
- Location: West Singhbhum district, Jharkhand; name means “land of seven hundred hills”.
- Saranda Forest Division covers about 856 sq km (816 sq km reserved forest).
- Past: a hunting ground of the Seraikela royal family, later the Saranda Game Sanctuary under a 1968 Bihar notification, which the Court upheld.
What the Court laid down
- Notify the sanctuary; six compartments under the state’s Management Plan for Sustainable Mining are left out.
- A 1 km eco-sensitive zone around it; mining is generally barred in the sanctuary and buffer.
- SAIL and other valid mining operations were exempted in an October 2025 clarification.
- The case is heard under the T.N. Godavarman continuing mandamus; an NGT order of July 2022 asking the state to consider sanctuary status went unheeded.
Ecology versus economy
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Species | Sal forest tortoise, four-horned antelope, Asian palm civet, wild elephants |
| Elephants | Three corridors linking Jharkhand and Odisha; core of the Singhbhum Elephant Reserve (2001) |
| WII survey count | 79 plants, 23 mammals, 138 birds, 27 reptiles, 32 butterflies |
| Iron ore | About 26% of India’s reserves; mines yield 10-15 million tonnes a year (about 5% of national output) |
| Operators | SAIL and Tata Steel |
| People | Ho, Munda and other Adivasi groups including PVTGs; Fifth Schedule area with FRA 2006 and PESA 1996 applicable |
Concerns
- The state cites tribal rights, FRA and PESA implementation, mining dependence, infrastructure and livelihood needs, and difficulty demarcating forest from revenue land.
- The editorial’s line: non-compliance weakens the rule of law, and the Court has already made room by excluding compartments, exempting SAIL and protecting tribal rights.
- Possible routes if the state persists: contempt proceedings, review, curative petition, or compliance with modifications.
- Wider issues: Centre-state friction, and the tribal rights versus conservation versus mining dilemma.
Background
- Section 26A: states may notify an area as a sanctuary if it has adequate ecological, faunal, floral, geomorphological or zoological value.
- Godavarman case (1995): ongoing Supreme Court supervision of forests, wildlife and mining; continuing mandamus means repeated orders in one case.
- WII: autonomous institute under MoEFCC, set up in 1982 at Dehradun.
- Fifth Schedule: administration of Scheduled Areas outside Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram; Jharkhand is among states with such areas.
- PESA 1996: gives Gram Sabhas authority over community resources and requires consultation before land acquisition. FRA 2006 recognises individual, community and habitat rights.
- Singhbhum Elephant Reserve: Jharkhand’s only one, under Project Elephant (1992).
- ESZ: a shock-absorber belt around protected areas, usually 1-10 km wide.
- Shah Commission (2010) probed illegal iron ore and manganese mining, finding extraction worth over ₹14,000 crore in Jharkhand.
- Constitutional hooks: Article 48A, Article 51A(g) and Article 21.
Exam angle
- Saranda: Asia’s largest Sal (Shorea robusta) forest.
- Statutory section: 26A of WPA 1972.
- Related terms: continuing mandamus, ESZ, PVTG, Singhbhum Elephant Reserve.