Project Topic:

FOREST LAWS IN INDIA: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

1. INTRODUCTION:- India has always been concerned with its green resources and thus it
has enacted a lot of acts regarding that. The most important of them was the Indian forest Act,
1927. After that, there has been three forest policy announcements in independent India; the
Forest Policy of 1952, The National Commission on Agriculture, 1976 (NCA) and the 1988
Forest Policy and then the Biodiversity act, 2002 and the Environment protection act, 1986 also
govern a lot of rules related to the forest areas.

India at first enacted the Indian Forest Act, 1927 but it was a business oriented act. Then, Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980 was enacted but it was also having loopholes. The Judiciary has
contributed to the development of forest law in India by widening the scope of locus standi and
entertaining Public interest litigation in India. It is true. The provisions of Forest law were mere
letters but the judicial interpretation has given life and blood to them.

Forest was in abundance in ancient India. Th religion, culture and tradition of ancient India
favoured protection of flora and fauna. only rational utilisation of forest resources for human
needs and welfare was made. However. imperial control over Indian forest initiated by Indian
rulers and continued by the British regime brought out a revenue oriented policy towards forest.
The Britishers favoured over-exploitation of Indian forests to protect the mercantile interests and
to meet the demand of their army and navy. The Forest Acts of 1865. 1878 and 1927 were
instrumental in achieving that object. Even after independence. the revenue oriented policy
towards exploitation of forest was not changed and the Indian Forest Act 1927 continued to be in
force in Indian territories. states which enacted separate legislation on forest relied on the
provisions of the Indian Forest Act without analysing the impact of such a law on forest.

2. INDIAN FOREST ACT, 1927In a vast majority of Indian States the law relating to forest
was governed by the provisions of the Indian Forest Act 19271 amended suitably by individual
States. . The Indian Forest Act 1927 as well as State legislation relating to forest sought to ensure
protection of forest by bringing forest under the control and supervision of the State

1
Government. Since forest was considered as the property of Government, there was no need of
separate vesting of forests in the Government so as to protect them. Under the Indian Forest Act,
the State Government is authorised to exercise control over such rights by classifying forests into
reserved forests,2 protected forests3 and village forests.4 in reserved forests everything that is not
permitted is an offence, while in protected forests only the commission of prohibited acts
constitute an offence. village forests are those forests which are assigned to village
communities.5 Governmental control is least in village forests when compared to reserved and
protected forests.

It was clear from the approach of the government that the act was made for the purposes of
collection of revenue and not for the conservation of the forest lands and the forest areas. Even
on revenue considerations forest needed protection. Offenders were permitted to encroach upon
the forest areas or smuggle valuable timber, Ivory and other forest produce. The punishment of
six months imprisonment or a fine of Rs.500/- as provided in the Central legislation was
inadequate to prevent the commission of offences relating to forest. Though from the
environmental point of view. damage done to forest by felling of trees or hunting of animals
cannot be compensated in terms of money yet if larger sums were collected from offenders as
compensation for the commission of the offence, it could have had some deterrent effect on the
offender. The three-fold classification of forests ie. reserved forests, protected forests and village
forests. under the Indian forest act had no relevance in protecting the environmental value of
forest. It only denoted the differential degree of control exercised by the covernment over the
rights of communities over forest. The controls are imposed to earn maximum revenue from
forest

3. FOREST CONSERVATION ACT, 1980-- After the Indian Forest Act, 1927; the need
was felt to protect the forest areas because that act was a totally business purposes and
revenue driven act.. The United Nations Conference on human environment held in Stockholm
in 1972 aroused a world wide environmental consciousness. It had its impact in India also. The
Constitution of India was amended in 1976 to include environmental safeguards. The Forest
(Conservation) Act 1980 was passed to arrest large scale deforestations. Department of
2
Indian Forest Act 1927 S.20.
3
Indian Forest Act 1927 S.29.
4
Indian Forest Act 1927 S.28.
5
B.Ribbentroop,ggrestrikingritishiindia (1900), p.111
Environment and Forest was established at the Centre. This act had considerably reduced the
power of the State Government in authorizing deforestation.. . However, the term ‘non forest
purpose’ has given a chance to state government for abuse of power. The provision which grants
exemption from the requirement of approval for assignment of forest land to any authority,
corporation, agency or organisation owned, managed or controlled by Government was another
loophole in the Forest (conservation) Act.6

Some of the silent features of this act were:

 Restrictions on the use of forests for non-forest purpose

 Restrictions n the dereservation of reserve forests,
 Regulation concerning the diversion of forest lands by way of lease to industries and
individuals
 Restriction on the clear felling of trees and

Constitution of an advisory committee to grant an approval for the conduct of any activity for
which an approval of the Central Government is required.

4. FOREST RIGHTS ACT, 2006:- The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest
Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA) was enacted to recognize and vest the
forest rights and occupation in forest land in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other
traditional forest dwellers who have been residing in such forests for generations but whose
rights could not be recorded.

The Forest Rights Act, 2006 basically does two things:

 Grants legal recognition to the rights of traditional forest dwelling communities, partially
correcting the injustice caused by the forest laws.
 Makes a beginning towards giving communities and the public a voice in forest and
wildlife conservation.

It is expected that the Act will redress the "historical injustice" committed against forest dwellers
and at the same time make forest conservation more effective and more transparent.

6
The Forest (conservation) Act 1980, S.2 (iii).
In brief, the Act offers four important rights to forest dwelling people

Title rights (ownership) - to land that is being farmed by tribals or forest dwellers as on
December 13, 2005, subject to a maximum of 4 hectares.

Use rights - To minor forest produce (also including ownership), to grazing areas, to pastoralist
routes, etc. The law provides the following for rights to use and/or collect: a. Minor forest
produce things like tendu patta, herbs, medicinal plants etc

Forest management rights 7- to protect forests and wildlife Though the forest is supposed to
belong to all of us, till date no one except the Forest Department had a right to protect it

Relief and development rights - to rehabilitate in case of illegal eviction or forced displacement;
and access to basic amenities subject to restrictions for forest protection

The government will still have access to forest land for developmental activities like schools,
hospitals, anganwadis, drinking water, water pipelines, roads, electric and telecommunication
lines, etc through the consent of the relevant Gram Sabha.

Thus, this was the need and the most salient features of the new act related to forest laws in
India. The expected impact of this act is that it shall remove the historical injustice, help in
environment protection and also stop organized land grabbing.

5. ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

The judiciary played an important role in protecting forests and wildlife, by leaving the core
areas uncovered by the law as appropriate for legislative action than for judicial formulation

Through the tool of PIL (Public Interest Litigation) the Supreme Court had dealt with variety of
issues related to conservation of forest, preservation and protection of wildlife,8 protecting the
rights of tribal people and thus balancing the symbiotic relationship between the forest dwellers
and the goal of forest conservation

The Supreme Court has interpreted and enforced the provisions of Forest Conservation Act 1980
strictly in: T.N.Godavarman Thirumalkpad v. Union of India Facts: Thirumulpad was
7
Sec. 3 of Forest Rights Act, 2006.
8
Pyarelal v State AIR 1995 SC 1159; Lakshman v State of MP AIR 1983 SC 656.
distressed on seeing the destruction of pristine wooded areas in Gudalur in the Nilgiris, Tamil
Nadu. These wooded areas, Janmam Lands (absolute proprietary lands), of the Nilambur
Kovilakam, had been taken over by the State of Kerala following the enactment of the Gudalur
Janmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act of 1969. However, the State was
unable to protect the areas. Trees were being felled and logs rolled down the mountain slopes
and stacked along the highway for miles on end. Godavarman Thirumulpad filed a writ petition
in the Supreme Court.

the Court issued sweeping directives to enforce the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. The Court
ordered to close wood based industries and on exploitation of forest and forest product. The
Court also created Central and State committees to enforce the directions it issued in this case.
The court recognized that FCA was enacted with a view to check ecological imbalance caused
by rapid deforestation. It was clearly stated by the Court that the provisions of the act must apply
to all the forests irrespective of the ownership or classification thereof.

Forest conservation law in India is not only impacted by the Godavarman case alone but also by
the decisions of the Supreme Court in the Centre for Environmental Law, WWF- India v. Union
of India9 which is related to protection of National Parks and Sanctuaries. Although the principle
concern of the case is related to the issues of settlement of rights in National parks and
Sanctuaries, yet its scope is much beyond this issue

The Court had firmly disallowed the non-forest activities and granting of lease for non forest
activities in forests. Renewal of stone crushing lease without prior permission of the from the
Central Government was considered a serious breach of duty in the case Dhirendra agrawal v.
State of Bihar.10 The use of forest land for non forest purpose was clearly denied by the court in
the case of State of Bihar v. Banshi Ram Modi. 11 Similarly excavations of iron ore12 and
tourism13 in forest were highly criticised by the Supreme Court.

9
W.P.337 of 1995.
10
AIR 1993 Pat 109.
11
AIR 1985 SC 814.
12
B V Joshi v State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1989 AP 122.
13
Union of India v Kamath Holiday resorts Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1996 SC 1040.
In M.C. Mehta v Kamal Nath and Others14 the Supreme Court felt the need to strike a balance
between public utility as well as necessity to maintain the environment. The Court observed,
“Sustainable development is essentially a policy and strategy for continued economic and social
development without detriment to the environment and natural resources on the quality of which
continued activity and further development depend.

6. CONCLUSION

India has approximately 23 per cent of its geographical area under tree cover. However, between
the federal states the area covered under forests differs widely (refer figure 1). Forests in India
were notified and recorded much before independence from the British in 1947. The recorded
forest areas fall under three categories: Reserved, protected and unclassed

India at first enacted the Indian Forest Act, 1927 but it was a business oriented act. Then, Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980 was enacted but it was also having loopholes. The Judiciary has
contributed to the development of forest law in India by widening the scope of locus standi and
entertaining Public interest litigation in India, enunciating a web of doctrines and interpreting
Constitutional law from environmental perspectives. It is true. The provisions of Forest law were
mere letters but the judicial interpretation has given life and blood to them.

Finally, The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest
Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA) was enacted to recognize and vest the forest rights and occupation in
forest land in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers who have
been residing in such forests for generations but whose rights could not be recorded.

14
(1997) 1 SCC 388.