Forest Conservation Norms: SC on Compensatory Afforestation
Why in the news
Hearing petitions against the 2023 changes to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that forest land cannot shrink unless equal land is given for compensatory afforestation.
Key facts
- Linear projects: no diversion of forest land unless matching land is provided for compensatory afforestation.
- Bench: Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran.
- Forest meaning: the Court reaffirmed the broad sense from the 1996 T.N. Godavarman case, covering all types of forest regardless of status or ownership, including undeclared and community forests (1.97 lakh sq km identified).
- Records: States and UTs must compile full forest land records within one year, per the Environment Ministry’s November 2023 notification.
The two sides
| Petitioners | Government |
|---|---|
| Section 1A of the amended Act dilutes the forest definition to declared forests and post-1980 government-recorded forests. | No reduction in cover; ‘government records’ now include lands recognised by local bodies and communities. |
Significance and concerns
- Stronger protection: land taken for development must be replaced.
- States cannot escape duty through reclassification.
- Highways, pipelines and railways may see delays and cost overruns.
Exam angle
- Amended in 2023: Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
- Landmark case: T.N. Godavarman (1996).