Forest Conversation Act, 1980 | Environmental Law - CLAT PG PDF Download

Introduction

• Forests are a vital natural resource and a vibrant expression of nature.
• They serve as protectors of wildlife and are valued for their flora, fauna, minerals, watersheds, river origins, desertification control, recreation, and scenic beauty.
• Forests play a crucial role in carbon dioxide management, helping to mitigate global warming. Cutting trees releases carbon dioxide, contributing to the greenhouse effect and climate change.
• Forests have been cut down at unprecedented rates, with India having only 19% vegetation cover compared to the ideal 33%.

Historical perspective

• The Rigveda and other ancient texts show that people revered nature (trees, plants, animals) and treated them as divine, leading to the protection of forests.
• The Mastya Purana and Manusmriti emphasized the importance of trees and condemned cutting green trees.
• Kautilya, in the Arthashastra, instructed kings to protect and plant forests for the benefit of the kingdom.
• Emperor Ashoka promoted forest protection and tree planting along roads.

British Period

• During the British period, forests were seen as a source of revenue, leading to widespread destruction for agriculture and land cultivation.
• The Forest Act of 1865 was the first attempt to regulate forests, aimed at acquiring Indian forest areas for timber supply and asserting state control over forest land.
• The Indian Forest Act of 1878 classified forests into reserved, protected, and village forests, with varying levels of rights and restrictions.

Forest Act, 1927

• A comprehensive Forest Act was passed in 1927 to consolidate and improve forest laws, consisting of 86 sections across 13 chapters.
• The Act focused on the regulation of forest produce, transit, and levying duties on timber and other forest products.
• The term "forest" was not explicitly defined in the Act.

Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

• This Act restricted the use of forest land for non-forest purposes and controlled the de-reservation of forests.
• It shifted authority over forests from state governments to the Central Government, requiring prior approval for non-forest uses.
• Non-forest purposes included activities like cultivation of certain crops, while reforestation and conservation activities were exempt.
• The Act also mandated prior approval for de-notifying reserved forests.

Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of UP

• This case addressed the notification of reserved forests and its impact on Adivasis living there.
• The state argued that the land was acquired for a thermal power station to provide cheaper electricity.
• The court ruled that already acquired land was not part of the writ petition, highlighting the importance of land acquisition processes.

Defining the term 'forest'

• In the Godavarman case, the Supreme Court defined 'forest' based on its dictionary meaning, including all statutory recognized forests.
• 'Forest land' encompassed any area recorded as a forest in government records, irrespective of ownership.
• This clarification aimed to prevent state governments from narrowly interpreting 'forest' and de-notifying forests for non-forest purposes.

Regulation of activities

• The judiciary's involvement in forest management has faced criticism for micromanagement and assuming regulatory functions.
• The establishment of quasi-executive bodies like Central Empowered Committee (CEC) by the judiciary raised concerns about separation of powers.
• The Supreme Court's approach to forest encroachments led to violations of tribal and forest dweller rights due to impractical eviction directives.
• Critics argue that some judicial directions lack practicality and understanding of diverse regional conditions.
• Rationalizing forest boundaries may require notifying revenue lands and de-notifying forest lands, but the Court's approach is limited to notified forests.

Conclusion

• The Indian Forest Act, 1927 led to forest deterioration, prompting the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, which requires central government approval for forest diversion.
• The Supreme Court has been instrumental in shaping forest laws, monitoring governance through cases like Godavarman and establishing mechanisms like CAMPA.
• Critiques of the judiciary's role highlight issues of micromanagement and separation of powers.
• The legal framework for forests should be evaluated for its impact on conservation and the rights of tribals, forest dwellers, and communities dependent on forests.