Full Judgment Text
2026 INSC 605
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6395-6397 OF 2025
A. JOHN KENNEDY
AND OTHERS ....APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU
AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Mehta, J.
1. Heard in part.
2. The instant appeals involve two diverse issues
concerning (i) preservation of Reserve Forests,
Wildlife Sanctuaries and Tiger Reserves in the State
of Tamil Nadu, and (ii) the claim of the appellants,
being displaced tea estate workers, claiming
rehabilitation pursuant to their eviction from an
erstwhile tea estate, the Bombay Burma Trading
Corporation Limited (BBTCL) located in Singampatti,
Tamil Nadu, after the same was declared to be a
Reserved Forest, Wildlife Sanctuary and Tiger
Reserve under the provisions of the Wild Life
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2026.05.30
13:22:30 IST
Reason:
(Protection) Act, 1972.
1
3. While considering the larger issue relating to
ecological preservation and protection of wildlife
habitats in the Agasthyamalai landscape, this Court
th
vide order dated 24 March 2025 issued the following
interim directions: -
“27. In view of the submissions noted above and as
an interim measure, to initiate the process of
restoration of the pristine forest areas and to
protect the tiger habitats/wildlife
reserves/sanctuaries falling under the
Agasthyamalai landscape, we hereby direct the
CEC to conduct an extensive survey of the entire
Agasthyamalai landscape, which would include
Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled
Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai and
Thirunelveli Wildlife Sanctuaries. The CEC shall
indicate in its report all instances of non-forestry
activities going on in these areas contrary to the
statutory provisions viz, the Forest Conservation
Act, 1980, the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, etc.
28. Comparative data pertaining to the forest cover
as it existed earlier vis-à-vis the current position
shall also be provided so as to gauge the extent of
depletion/degradation in the forest area.
29. The CEC shall also recommend measures for
restoration of (a) the reserved forests, (b) the tiger
habitats, and (c) elephant corridors and (d) other
wildlife reserves (sanctuaries) in and around the
Agasthyamalai landscape, including the
abovementioned sanctuaries/reserves. For this
purpose, the CEC may employ all scientific
procedures including Remote Sensing Satellite
Imagery, Geo Mapping etc., so that the process of
survey can be expedited.”
2
th
I. CEC REPORT NO. 33 OF 2025 DATED 10
JULY, 2025 (INTERIM REPORT)
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid directions, the CEC
th
submitted its Interim Report dated 10 July, 2025,
wherein it was observed that the Agasthyamalai
Ecological Landscape covers 3,500.36 square
kilometers, encompassing the following districts in
Tamil Nadu: Tirunelveli, Tenkasi, Kanyakumari,
Theni and Dindigul; and in Kerala:
Thiruvananthapuram, Kollam, Pathanamthitta and
Idukki. The CEC conducted field visits to the
rd
Agasthyamalai Landscape from 23 June, 2025 to
th
26 June, 2025 covering key Protected Areas
including the Kanyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary
(KWS), Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve
(KMTR), Srivilliputhur-Megamalai Tiger Reserve
(SMTR), and Periyar Tiger Reserve.
5. In respect of the Srivilliputhur-Megamalai Tiger
Reserve (SMTR), the CEC observed that it is the most
ecologically vulnerable area, which forms the upper
catchment of the Vaigai River, a critical water source
for five downstream districts. It was further observed
that data on encroachments and land use is scarce,
official records are incomplete or inconsistent, and
3
field-level efforts and inter-departmental
coordination toward enforcement and restoration
remain minimal. Significantly, despite specific and
time-bound directions from this Court for the
removal of encroachments, the State district
administration continues to extend facilities and
amenities such as infrastructure support, welfare
schemes, and subsidies to the encroachers at par
with law-abiding citizens.
6. As per official records of 2020, around 4,595
individuals are encroaching upon 5,071.27 hectares
of Reserved Forest land spread across key ranges like
Varusanadu, Megamalai, Gandamanur, and
Chinnamanur. The CEC noted that these
encroachments are old, many involving permanent
cultivation of crops such as silk cotton, cardamom,
and beans, and that in spite of clear orders of the
Madras High Court to remove the encroachments, no
significant progress has been made so far.
7. As per the report submitted by the District
Magistrate of Theni District, a total of 4,601
encroachers have occupied 5,072.653 hectares of
land in Reserved Forests across Theni district. Thus
far, only 1.8% of the total encroached forest land has
4
been reclaimed. A total of 116 government and public
utility structures have been constructed inside forest
lands without prior approval under the Forest
(Conservation) Act 1980. There are also serious
violations of the Tamil Nadu Hill Areas (Preservation
of Trees) Act, 1955, by cultivation of silk cotton,
cardamom, lemon grass, cashew, beans, and other
tree crops on forested hill slopes across over 5,000
hectares.
8. Alarmingly, a total of 118 individuals listed as
encroachers have been identified as serving or retired
government employees, including personnel from the
Army, Police, CRPF, Forest Department, Revenue
Department, Electricity Board, Anganwadi, School
Education, Panchayats, Survey Department and
other services.
9. Although directions were issued by the Madras
th 1
High Court vide order dated 17 March, 2022 to the
Superintendent of Police, Theni, to form a special
task force to assist in forest eviction, thus far, no FIRs
or criminal cases have been registered for forest
1
W.P.(MD) Nos. 6994, 6998, 10566 of 2021 and 22146 of 2017, along
with W.M.P.(MD) Nos. 5370, 5372, 8226 of 2021, 1839 of 2022, and
13360, of 2021
5
encroachment; no encroacher arrests have been
made; and no special unit deployment had occurred
th
as of 25 June, 2025.
10. With regard to the Kanyakumari Wildlife
Sanctuary (KWS), the CEC reported that there is
sizeable encroachment and various issues of non-
availability of verified maps of the reserve forest. An
area of 427.40 hectare has been covered under
various encroachments in Kanyakumari Forest
Division, in which an area of 237.09 hectare is
involved in litigation. Law and order issues have
arisen whenever the Forest Department has
attempted to evict encroachers, and a joint effort of
the Survey, Revenue, Police, and Forest Departments
was found to be necessary.
11. On the basis of the information gathered and
preliminary observations, the CEC issued the
following interim recommendations:-
“a) A time-bound, division-wise encroachment
eviction plan shall be prepared and implemented as
a matter of priority, with clear timelines,
measurable milestones, and designated officer-
level responsibilities.
b) The plan shall include strategies for physical,
eviction, rehabilitation where applicable, legal
action. against willful, violators, and post-eviction
restoration to ensure that reclaimed forest lands
6
are hot reoccupied. Failure to act in accordance
with the approved plan shall invite administrative
accountability at the highest level.
c) A dedicated Forest Protection and Encroachment
Eviction Task Force shall be constituted and
operationalized by the District Police, with clearly
defined lines of accountability, jurisdictional
coordination, and time-bound targets for
enforcement and eviction.
d) The State Law Department shall monitor the
progress of the proceedings of various cases filed by
or against the encroachers in district courts for
their early disposal.
e) Disciplinary and legal action shall be initiated
against all identified government servants found to
be encroachers, under Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu
Government Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1973.
f) A blanket moratorium shall be placed on all
welfare schemes, public utilities, and
infrastructure support in encroached forest land
areas, to prevent incentivizing illegal occupation.
g) There shall be a blanket moratorium on all new
non-forestry activities within forest areas, pending
the dismantling of infrastructure constructed in
violation of the provisions of the Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980, or the grant of post-facto
approvals for such works strictly as per guidelines
of the Central Government.
h) Adequate budgets shall be allotted by the State
Government to the Forest Department for the
immediate restoration and protection of the area
freed from encroachment.
i) The progress of eviction of all encroachments and
restoration of forest area freed from encroachment
shall be reviewed by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu, on a monthly basis,
7
with a copy of the minutes of each review meeting
submitted to the CEC.”
12. Thereafter, in continuation of its earlier exercise
and upon further monitoring of the situation on the
ground, the CEC submitted its second report (Report
th
No. 02 of 2026) dated 16 January, 2026.
th
II. CEC REPORT NO. 02 OF 2026 DATED 16
JANUARY, 2026 (SECOND REPORT)
13. In this report, the CEC submitted that despite
continued monitoring and repeated directions,
complete and duly verified records of land ownership
and encroachments from the District Authorities of
the Megamalai and adjoining forest divisions are yet
to be furnished. The CEC noted that gaps continue in
receiving crucial inputs including final comparative
forest cover analysis, geospatial data from the Forest
Survey of India (FSI), and verified records on land
ownership and encroachments from the District
Authorities of Megamalai and adjoining forest
divisions.
14. In respect of the Kalakad-Mudanthurai Tiger
Reserve (KMTR), the CEC reported that the total
extent of encroachment is 10.16 hectares by 99
8
families. In the Papanasam area, the encroachers are
workers for the construction of the Papanasam Upper
and Lower Dams, who later settled in the forest area.
th
Eviction notices were issued on 11 November, 1996
th
and 18 November, 1996, but the eviction could not
be carried out as the Tahsildar refused to sign the
eviction mahazar and left the site. The matter was
deferred, pending identification of alternative sites for
rehabilitation. In 2004, the Tahsildar,
Ambasamudram, forwarded 216 pattas for an
alternative site at Aladiyur village for the encroachers
and Kani tribals. While the Kani tribals subsequently
received titles under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, the
encroachers refused to accept the pattas and vacate
rd
the forest land. Thereafter, by Proceeding dated 23
September, 2021, the Sub-Collector,
Cheranmahadevi allotted alternative land at
Vellanguzhi village, which was also rejected. In a
further attempt, 21 families agreed to relocate upon
issuance of pattas and accordingly free pattas were
th
issued on 29 May, 2025 for land in
Vikramasingapuram Municipality, Ambasamudram
Taluk. Even thereafter, the encroachers refused to
9
vacate and began demanding construction of free
houses.
15. Notwithstanding the absence of any legal right
to remain within the Tiger Reserve, the encroachers
continue to enjoy electricity, drinking water, voter
identity cards and access to facilities meant for Kani
tribal communities. They have also defied notices to
remove cattle from forest areas, thereby frustrating
every lawful attempt at eviction despite adequate
offers of rehabilitation.
16. With regard to Lease Rent Payable by Bombay
Burmah Trading Corporation Limited (BBTCL) in
respect of KMTR, the Madras High Court, by an order
th
of 18 August, 2025 passed in W.A. No. 1435 of
2024, adjudicated and disposed of the pending
disputes between the BBTCL and the State
Government. The lease rent payable by BBTCL, with
interest and penal interest for the period from 1958
st
up to 31 August, 2025, has been computed year-
wise, amounting in total to Rs.4,655,24,33,533.21
(Rupees Four Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Five Crore
Twenty-Four Lakh Thirty-Three Thousand Five
Hundred Thirty-Three and Paise Twenty-One only).
10
17. In respect of the Kanyakumari Wildlife
Sanctuary (KWS), the CEC reported that there are
553 encroachers, occupying an area of 427.404
hectares. Trial in civil cases in respect of 230.61
hectares of forest land, by 47 encroachers, is in
progress. No original maps for these reserve forests
are available, and only attested copies are available.
18. With regard to the Srivilliputhur Megamalai
Tiger Reserve (SMTR), despite the preparation of an
Action Plan in 2022 for removal of encroachments in
SMTR, implementation has been slow. Phase-I of the
programme covers only 81 encroachers, of whom 66
have been relocated so far, and an extent of 52.86
hectares of forest land have been recovered. Even in
respect of these 66 cases, the process of taking over
cultivation, buildings and other assets has not been
fully completed and continues to remain pending,
thereby permitting continued illegal use of forest
land.
19. The CEC further submitted that no
comprehensive, time-bound plan has been
implemented to address the large number of other
encroachments that continue to exist within the Tiger
Reserve and its core forest areas. The functioning of
11
the Special Task Force constituted by the District
Collector, Theni has also been confined largely to
paperwork and coordination meetings, with its
activities primarily limited to updating databases,
verifying survey numbers, and identifying
government services extended to encroachers. There
is no evidence of any decisive, field-level enforcement
or accelerated eviction drive being undertaken
through the Task Force.
20. A Special Police Team headed by the Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Andipatti Sub-Division, has
been constituted for SMTR, however, its role has
remained largely confined to maintaining law and
order during surveys and eviction attempts. The CEC
states in its report that there is no indication of any
proactive enforcement, initiation of criminal
proceedings, or sustained field operations by the said
team either for the removal of encroachments or for
prosecuting the violators under the Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980.
21. The CEC also noted that on account of protests
and obstructions, the boundary fixation exercise
continues to remain fragile, fragmented and grossly
inadequate to secure the forest lands of this critical
12
tiger landscape from continuing illegal occupation.
Further, the State admits that schools, Anganwadi
centers and Public Distribution System (PDS) outlets
continue to function within encroached forest
hamlets. Instead of being closed or relocated outside
the forest, these facilities have merely been “reduced”
or kept in limited operation. The State has not
vacated any functioning government building from
forest land and has, instead, adopted a policy of slow
and gradual withdrawal, thereby allowing the
continued physical presence of government
infrastructure which has the effect of legitimizing and
sustaining the illegal occupation on forest lands.
22. With regard to Protected Areas in Kerala, since
th
the CEC’s report of 10 July, 2025, there has been
no material change in the encroachment in protected
areas in Kerala. Approximately 700 non-tribal
inhabitants live in the core area of the Periyar Tiger
Reserve, and 1.3354 hectares are encroached in
Kattilapara and Rosemala settlements in the
Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary. These
encroachments have not thus far been removed.
23. The Forest Survey of India (FSI) submitted a
preliminary report indicating a declining trend in
13
forest cover and quality, and water and soil fertility
over time. Certain non-forest activities resulting in
fragmentation of forest are overtly visible on satellite
images in the form of agriculture, plantations,
buildings, linear infrastructure, and other features.
Protected areas are also surrounded by high human
density villages and are exposed to anthropogenic
effects. Hilly forest patches only exist today as
fragmented isolated islands in a sea of human-
dominated landscape, which hinders the dispersal of
native species and may have aided in the spread of
invasive species further degrading forest quality.
24. In its Second Report, the CEC made the
following additional recommendations:-
“(i) A time-bound, division-wise encroachment
eviction plan shall be prepared and implemented as
a matter of priority, with clearly defined timelines,
measurable milestones and designated officer-level
responsibilities.
(ii) The plan shall include physical eviction,
rehabilitation where applicable, legal action against
willful violators, and post-eviction ecological
restoration, so that reclaimed forest land is not re-
encroached. Failure to adhere to the approved plan
shall attract administrative accountability at the
highest level.
(iii) A dedicated Forest Protection and
Encroachment Eviction Task Force shall be
constituted at the district level under the
leadership of the concerned Divisional Forest
14
Officer, with the support of the District Magistrate
and the Superintendent of Police.
(iv) The State Law Department shall monitor all
cases relating to encroachments pending before
district courts and take steps for their expeditious
disposal.
(v) Disciplinary and legal action shall be initiated
against all identified government servants found to
be encroachers in SMTR, under Rule 3 of the Tamil
Nadu Government Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1973
and other applicable laws.
(vi) A blanket moratorium shall be imposed on all
welfare schemes, public utilities and infrastructure
support in encroached forest areas, so that illegal
occupation is not incentivised or legitimised.
(vii) The Central Government shall not approve any
proposal for diversion of forest land in the entire
Agasthyamalai landscape, for non-forestry
purposes under the provisions of the Forest
(Conservation) Act 1980, until all encroachments
are removed and illegal infrastructure dismantled
or regularised strictly in accordance with the Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980.
(viii) Strict penal action shall be initiated against all
officials and Heads of Departments who
commenced or permitted illegal infrastructure
works within Megamalai Wildlife Sanctuary in
violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980,
and a status report shall be filed within three
months.
(ix) All Government facilities within the
Srivilliputhur-Megamalai Tiger Reserve shall be
stopped, relocated and removed from forest land,
and all unauthorised infrastructure shall be
dismantled and removed within three months.
(x) All bus services to and from encroached forest
areas shall be stopped forthwith in accordance with
the recommendations of the Special Committee.
(xi) All illegal resorts operating in the Megamalai
area shall be made non-operational forthwith and
shall be removed.
15
(xii) All electricity connections to illegal resorts and
encroached areas shall be disconnected forthwith,
and all unauthorised electricity transmission lines
within forest areas shall be removed.
(xiii) The Forest Survey of India, under the
MoEFCC, shall survey and digitise the entire
boundary of SMTR and Kanyakumari Wildlife
Sanctuary within six months.
(xiv) There should be rigorous evaluation of the
KMTR and SMTR within next six months as per the
management effectiveness and security audit
framework institutionalized by the NTCA.
(xv) The State Government of Tamil Nadu shall
recover all dues from BBTC Ltd., including lease
rent, penalties and costs, in accordance with the
orders of the Hon’ble Madras High Court.
(xvi) The Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala,
shall ensure that all original maps, survey records
and land records of Kanyakumari Wildlife
Sanctuary in Kerala’s custody are transferred to
the Tamil Nadu Forest Department within three
months. The Chief Secretary, Tamil Nadu shall
coordinate with Chief Secretary, Kerala to get it
expedited.
(xvii) All court cases relating to encroachments in
Kanyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary pending in Kerala
shall be transferred to the competent courts in
Kanyakumari District, Tamil Nadu.
(xviii) The respective State Government shall
provide adequate budgetary support to the Forest
Department for the restoration and protection of
lands freed from encroachment.
(xix) The Chief Secretaries of the concerned States
shall review eviction and restoration progress every
month, and the minutes of each review meeting
shall be submitted to the CEC.
(xx) The representative from NTCA and IRO,
MoEFCC shall conduct inspection of SMTR, KMTR
and Kanyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary on quarterly
basis and submit report on the observations with
respect to the status of encroachment and
16
restoration of areas freed from encroachment to the
CEC.
(xxi) As this issue require continuous monitoring
before the matter can be comprehensively
addressed, the CEC proposes to submit periodic
reports before the Hon’ble Court till the matter is
fully resolved.
(xxii) Any other order that this Hon’ble Court may
pass.”
III. REPLY AFFIDAVIT OF THE STATE OF
TAMIL NADU
25. Pursuant to the submission of the aforesaid
reports by the CEC, this Court directed the State of
Tamil Nadu to file its response with regard to the
observations and recommendations contained
therein. In compliance with the said directions, the
State of Tamil Nadu has filed a detailed reply affidavit
responding to both the CEC Reports and setting out
the steps undertaken by the State authorities in
relation to encroachment removal, restoration
measures, rehabilitation efforts and protection of the
forest and wildlife areas within the Agasthyamalai
landscape. The State has expressed its commitment
to implementing the CEC’s recommendations in letter
and spirit, while acknowledging the challenges
highlighted therein. The relevant points emerging
from the reply affidavit are set out hereunder.
17
A. Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR) -
Papanasam Area
26. The total extent of encroachment in KMTR is
10.16.00 hectares, comprising around 99 families
who had worked during the construction of the
Papanasam Upper Dam (Karaiyar Dam) and Lower
Dam in 1942. During the construction of the Servalar
dam in 1986, a few of them moved there and settled.
Several attempts have been made by the Forest
Department for eviction, the first attempt resulting in
the filing of W.P. No. 5242-5248 of 1963 by the
encroachers, wherein the Madras High Court vide
rd
order dated 3 July, 1998, directed the encroachers
to be evicted by providing them alternative sites. Vide
th
proceedings dated 30 September, 2004, the
Tahsildar, Ambasaamudram had allotted 216 free
pattas in Aladiyur Village for the encroachers and
Kani tribals. The Kani tribals subsequently received
titles under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 whereas the
encroachers refused to accept the pattas and vacate
forest land. A second attempt was made to evict the
rd
encroachers based on proceedings dated 23
September, 2021 by the Sub-Collector,
Cheranmahadevi allotting alternative land in
18
Vellanguzhi village. However, the encroachers did not
vacate the forest land. A third attempt has also been
th
made on 29 May, 2025 by allotting 21 families, free
patta in Ambasamudhram Taluk. However, the
encroachers are not vacating forest land for want of
constructed accommodation in the allotted
alternative land.
27. The State has submitted that though notices
were issued directing the encroachers to relocate
their cattle outside the forest, the matter was
politicized and no desirable outcome was achieved.
The said issue has also been included in the District
Encroachment Steering Committee, a body
responsible for identifying, enumerating, and evicting
illegal occupations on government land, water bodies,
and public property, but no significant progress has
been achieved. The State has further submitted that
these encroachers have been in occupation of the
subject land for more than eight decades and
therefore, in view of the long duration of such
occupation and the attendant socio-economic
considerations including sentimental and emotional
attachment to the place of residence as expressed by
19
the occupants, it is proposed to adopt a phased
approach in carrying out the eviction process.
28. On the question of rehabilitation, the State has
submitted that the Forest Department, along with the
District Administration, are committed to providing
house sites outside the reserve under any suitable
scheme and necessary steps are also being taken to
identify and allot suitable alternative lands for
rehabilitation.
B. Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Limited
(BBTCL)
29. The State has submitted that out of the 8373.57
acres of leased land under the possession of M/s
BBTCL, an area of 8152.13 acres has already been
th
handed over to the Forest Department on 8 May,
2025, which amounts to 97.35% of the leased area.
With regard to the balance area of 221.44 acres
spread over five places at Manjolai, Kakkachi,
Nalumukku, Oothu and Kuthiraivetti, there are
factories, offices, schools, common places with shops,
weigh bridges, residential bungalows, labour lines,
religious structures etc. Presently, the Manjolai
factory has been completely dismantled, whereas
dismantling process is going on at Manimuthar and
20
Oothu factories and it is estimated that the
dismantling will be completed shortly. However, all
other buildings, infrastructures, offices,
bungalows, labour houses, religious structures
etc. belonging to the BBTC management are
planned to be left as they are.
30. As regards rehabilitation of BBTCL workers, the
plantation workers have been given 2 years’ salary as
part of the VRS package offered by BBTCL and as on
th
15 March, 2026, 210 workers have received 100%
of the VRS amount, which was deposited in the office
of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Nagercoil.
The estate workers have also been provided houses
free of cost and at present, 90 families have been
provided with Apartments under the Tamil Nadu
Urban Habitat Development Board in Pappankulam
and Reddiarpatti and 59 houses have been
constructed under the Kalignar Kanavu Illam
Scheme through the District Administration in their
own lands at different places. Out of the five areas,
entire labour population from Kakachi and
Kuthiraivetti area has moved out. However, a few
estate workers are still intermittently residing within
the estate premises and as per field verification and
21
daily data taken, approximately 140 individuals are
now staying within three estate areas i.e. Manjolai,
Nalumukku and Oothu. Essential public service
institutions such as post offices, schools and fair
price shops have already been relocated outside the
estate areas.
31. Since the election process in Tamil Nadu has
just been completed, it is proposed to initiate and
carry out the eviction proceedings in a time-bound
manner, in coordination with the District
Administration.
C. Kanyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary (KWS)
32. The State has submitted that the Kanyakumari
District was covered under the Erstwhile Travancore
Cochin Forest Act, and owing to the language and
system of forest administration, though the forests
that were handed over to Tamil Nadu State after
annexation were re-notified under the Tamil Nadu
Forest (Amendment) Act, 1965, there were challenges
in recognizing the boundaries. The forest boundaries
were altered or defaced or tampered by the
encroachers from time to time resulting in ambiguous
recognition of the forest boundary. A re-survey is yet
to be conducted to accurately delineate the forest
22
boundary, which step is described as crucial for
precise boundary identification prior to initiating the
eviction of encroachers. A total extent of 427.404
hectares of forest land is under encroachment,
distributed across various forest ranges. A phased
eviction plan has been formulated in accordance with
the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 and
the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, and priority has
been accorded to ecologically sensitive areas and core
wildlife habitats. It has also been proposed to
undertake comprehensive Differential Global
Positioning System (DGPS) survey to help resolve
disputes regarding forest boundary demarcation and
facilitate the eviction of encroachers.
D. Srivilliputhur-Megamalai Tiger Reserve (SMTR)
33. The State has submitted that the SMTR,
situated in Theni District, plays a crucial ecological
role as part of the Agasthyamalai landscape and
serves as a critical corridor connecting the Periyar
Tiger Reserve in Kerala. Megamalai, being home to a
rich biodiversity, is a significant catchment for the
Vaigai river system and other water bodies. Presently,
there are no active plantation leases in the forest
lands of SMTR. As per official records, around 4601
23
individuals have encroached upon 5072.653 hectares
and the range-wise extent of such encroachment is
as follows:-
Range Number of
Encroachers
Encroachment
Area (Ha)
Gandamanur 1725 510.902
Megamalai 344 720.735
Varusanadu 2523 3758.481
Chinnamanur 9 82.535
Total 4601 5072.653
34. The issue of encroachment has been under
litigation before the Madras High Court, wherein
several directives have been issued by the High Court
to address and curb the problem, and it had
accordingly directed the setting up of a Special Police
Team/Special Task Force (STF) to assist the Wildlife
Warden of Megamalai Range and other forest officials
for carrying out the eviction exercises.
35. With regard to the eviction plan, the State
submitted that eviction measures are being
undertaken through rehabilitation and resettlement.
During identification of the encroached areas, it was
found that the survey covered agricultural fields,
private lands, hilly terrain and wildlife regions. Public
agitation led to serious law-and-order concerns and
24
disturbance to wildlife movement, requiring careful
handling. Consequently, a phase-wise drone survey
was initiated, with the first phase conducted between
th th
24 February, 2026 and 27 February, 2026. The
Assistant Director (Survey), Theni District, reported
that the drone survey progresses at approximately 3
sq. km per day, with 210.07 sq. km still remaining to
be surveyed. The aerial survey itself is expected to
take at least six months, followed by field
demarcation and boundary fixation before a
comprehensive eviction plan can be finalized.
36. A Special Task Force (STF), constituted
st
pursuant to the order dated 1 November, 2018 in
WP(MD) No. 22146 of 2017, has been monitoring
encroachment classification, coordinating with
district authorities, and addressing law-and-order
concerns. A Special Police Team was also constituted
to assist in maintaining order during the survey
operations. While initial surveys were completed
without resistance, interior surveys were hampered
due to public protests, which were subsequently
controlled with police assistance.
37. The State further submitted that government
facilities in encroached areas are being gradually
25
withdrawn to discourage continued occupation. In
Bommarajapuram, services such as schools,
Anganwadis and PDS facilities have not been
expanded, no new buildings or renovations have been
approved, and ration distribution has been reduced
to once a week at a common location. Government
schemes and beneficiaries are being minimized
with the objective of encouraging resettlement
outside forest areas. Public demands seeking
stoppage of eviction, road renovation, school
construction and grant of FRA pattas were
rejected as involving unlawful activities, though
awareness regarding rehabilitation measures was
undertaken. The Animal Husbandry Department’s
weekly immunization programme in encroached
hamlets has also been discontinued.
th
38. As of 16 March, 2026, the State had recovered
15 hectares of forest land from Government officials,
while eviction proceedings concerning an additional
36.47 hectares were underway. Disciplinary and legal
action was proposed against 118 Government
servants involved in encroachment. 13 anti-
poaching/protection watchers engaged in the Tiger
Reserve who were found to have encroached upon
26
forest land were terminated, and cultivation in such
areas was stopped. Notices under Section 68A of the
Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 were also issued to 25
Government officials found in illegal possession of
forest land. According to the Deputy Director, SMTR
Megamalai Division, 16 hectares had already been
recovered and eviction from the remaining 29.3
hectares was in progress. Encroachers were
systematically categorized, with priority accorded to
cases involving Government officials, some of whom
voluntarily surrendered possession.
39. The State further reported that 116 Government
and public utility structures had been constructed
inside forest land without prior approval under the
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and action against
the responsible agencies and officials was under
process. Regarding illegal resorts, no new
development had taken place in Megamalai
Division; presently 3 resorts are operational and
3 partially operational out of 12 identified resorts,
with regulatory action being taken to reduce
ecological impact. Unauthorized cattle grazing
has also been strictly prohibited, and 66 forest
27
offence cases were registered for illegal grazing
between 2017 and 2026.
40. The State Government has formulated a
“Resettlement and Rehabilitation Action Plan” by way
of which a survey has been conducted in which
people have been classified into three categories:-
Number of
Category Description
Encroachers
Encroachment
Area (in Ha)
Have
permanent
house and
livelihood
through forest
Category 1
1595 1679.733
Have
temporary
house and
livelihood in the
forest
Category 2
233 525.204
Only
agriculture in
the forest
Category 3
2773 2867.706
41. Persons falling under Category 1 will be
relocated outside the forest area and 54 such families
have already moved to ready-built quarters provided
by the State Government. The State Government is in
the process of relocating the remaining encroachers
as well. Phase I of the resettlement and recovery
programme has been successful, and a total of 66
28
persons have been allocated houses. This has
resulted in the successful recovery of 52.86 hectares
(130.62 acres) of Forest Land. Further, all
administrative and field procedures concerning the
handover of assets including former cultivation
areas, permanent structures, and associated
improvements are now concluded for those 66
individuals, thereby ensuring that the recovered land
is fully restored to the jurisdiction of the Forest
Department. It has been also pointed out that a total
of 111.63.6 ha (275.84 Acre) area has been retrieved
from encroachers.
42. A time-bound comprehensive plan is to be
devised to address the issue of encroachment in
SMTR and the said plan will be submitted to the
Government after consultation with all line
Departments and stakeholders. Due to the election
process in Tamil Nadu, the said consultation and
survey process was suspended and will now resume
post-election. As the eviction process requires a
humanitarian approach and involves significant
physical and financial resources, a detailed plan is
being prepared, covering all key aspects.
29
43. In the reply affidavit, the State has candidly
acknowledged the following challenges being faced in
carrying out the eviction process:-
(a) Resistance from encroachers during eviction often
leads to tense situations, necessitating adequate
police support and advance planning.
(b) Ongoing court cases, interim orders, contempt
petitions, and repeated litigations delay enforcement
and require careful legal handling.
(c) Forest personnel involved in eviction are
frequently subjected to harassment complaints,
private complaints, theft allegations, damage claims,
and human rights petitions. Though such cases are
often dismissed, they create operational hazards and
affect morale, highlighting the need for legal
protection and institutional backing.
(d) Eviction does not conclude the issue, as evicted
persons often file compensation claims, particularly
in cultivation areas, leading to prolonged legal and
administrative follow-up.
(e) Many encroachers are landless and economically
weaker sections. Demands for alternative land and
livelihood considerations necessitate coordination
with Revenue authorities and policy-level decisions.
30
Effective eviction requires synchronized action
among Forest, Revenue, and Police Departments,
which shall be ensured.
(f) Remote and difficult forest terrains pose logistical
challenges in mobilizing manpower, machinery, and
ensuring sustained monitoring.
44. Despite the aforesaid challenges, the State has
submitted that continuous and coordinated efforts
are being undertaken, in consultation with the
District Administration and other concerned
Departments, to address the observations and
recommendations made by the CEC in a time-bound
manner. The State has reiterated its commitment
towards ensuring restoration of forest land,
preservation of ecological integrity and strict
compliance with the directions issued by this Court.
IV. ANALYSIS
45. We have heard the submissions advanced by
Shri K. Parmeshwar, learned Amicus Curiae , and Shri
Vijay Narayan, learned Advocate General appearing
for State of Tamil Nadu. We have also carefully
perused the material placed on record, including the
th
First CEC Report dated 10 July, 2025, Second CEC
31
th
Report dated 16 January, 2026, as well as the
detailed Reply affidavit filed on behalf of the State of
Tamil Nadu. We have given our careful and anxious
consideration to the submissions advanced before us
and to the facts and circumstances emerging from
the record.
46. The present proceedings concern not merely
questions of regulatory compliance or administrative
accountability, but strike at the very heart of
environmental governance and the constitutional
obligation of the State to preserve and protect
ecologically sensitive regions, fragile ecosystems, and
critically endangered wildlife for the benefit of present
and future generations.
A. Overall Assessment of the State’s Response
47. At the outset, this Court takes note of the fact
that the State of Tamil Nadu has, in its Reply
affidavit, candidly acknowledged the challenges
highlighted by the CEC in both its reports and has
expressed its institutional commitment to
implementing the CEC’s recommendations in letter
and spirit. The Reply affidavit demonstrates that the
State is not unmindful of the gravity of the situation
and has initiated several concrete measures towards
32
addressing encroachments, restoring habitats, and
strengthening conservation across the
Agasthyamalai landscape. The CEC has itself
acknowledged the efforts made by the State
Government towards the ecological restoration of
forest land and has noted that such efforts require to
be significantly strengthened, institutionalised, and
accelerated. This Court takes note of these measures
initiated and shall now proceed to assess their
adequacy and efficacy having regard to the scale and
urgency of the problem.
48. At the same time, this Court is constrained to
observe that the material placed on record, when
examined holistically, discloses that the measures
initiated by the State, while constituting a step in the
right direction, remain significantly below the
threshold of response that the gravity and urgency of
the situation demands. The issues arising in the
present proceedings are not of recent origin. The
encroachments within the protected areas of the
Agasthyamalai landscape - including the Kalakad-
Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, the Srivilliputhur-
Megamalai Tiger Reserve and the Kanyakumari
Wildlife Sanctuary have persisted and proliferated
33
over several decades, notwithstanding specific and
time-bound directions issued by the Madras High
Court, orders passed by this Court, and repeated
recommendations made by expert bodies including
the CEC. The CEC has, in both its reports,
painstakingly documented the extent of
encroachments, the inadequacy of enforcement
measures, the slow pace of eviction proceedings, the
continued extension of government amenities and
facilities to encroachers, the fact that a large number
of Government servants, former and present,
continue to encroach upon forest lands and the
absence of any comprehensive, time-bound and
adequately funded plan for restoration of forest land
and protection of wildlife habitats within the
Agasthyamalai landscape.
49. The reply affidavit filed by the State of Tamil
Nadu, while articulating commitments and
presenting several measures already undertaken or
proposed, also candidly places on record the practical
and administrative challenges confronting the State
in carrying out eviction operations on a large scale in
difficult and ecologically sensitive terrain. The State
has attributed the slow pace of progress to factors
34
such as resistance from encroachers, ongoing
litigation, logistical difficulties arising from difficult
terrain, the political sensitivity of the issue, and the
recent conduct of State elections which necessitated
temporary suspension of the survey and consultation
process. Thus, evidently the endeavours of the State
to remove the encroachments remain in the realm of
hollow promises.
50. This Court is not entirely averse to the
submissions of State, and it is cognizant of the fact
that eviction of thousands of persons who have been
resident in forest areas for extended periods, many of
whom are economically vulnerable. The task is
onerous and one involving considerable
administrative, logistical and humanitarian
complexity. However, having said that, this Court is
equally of the view that the obligation to protect
ecologically sensitive regions cannot stand
indefinitely deferred on account of such challenges,
and that what is required is a structured, time-bound
and adequately resourced institutional response that
simultaneously addresses the imperatives of
environmental protection and human rehabilitation.
35
B. Steps Taken by the State - Acknowledgment
and Assessment
51. Before examining the deficiencies in the State’s
response, it is appropriate for this Court to take note
of the positive steps that have been initiated. In
respect of the BBTCL issue within the KMTR
landscape, the State has submitted that out of
8,373.57 acres of leased land, an area of 8,152.13
acres, amounting to 97.35% of the total leased area
has already been handed over to the Forest
th
Department as of 8 May, 2025, which event is after
this Court took cognizance of the issue. Dismantling
of factory infrastructure is underway, with the
Manjolai factory having been completely dismantled
and work in progress at the Manimuthar and Oothu
factories. As regards rehabilitation of BBTCL
workers, 210 workers have received 100% of their
VRS entitlement, 90 families have been provided
apartments under the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat
Development Board, and 59 houses have been
constructed under the Kalignar Kanavu Illam
Scheme. Essential public service institutions
including post offices, schools and fair price shops
have already been relocated outside the estate areas.
36
The Court takes note of these measures as
demonstrating meaningful progress in the resolution
of the BBTCL issue, while also noting that the release
of remaining 221.44 acres area and the question of
restoration of the handed-over land as a forest
require expeditious attention.
52. In respect of SMTR, the State has placed on
record that it has formulated a Resettlement and
Rehabilitation Action Plan involving a three-category
classification of encroachers. Phase I of the
resettlement programme has resulted in 66 persons
being allocated houses and 52.86 hectares of forest
land being successfully recovered. A total of 111.63
hectares has been retrieved from encroachers in
aggregate. The State has initiated a drone survey
process to facilitate accurate boundary demarcation,
th
with the first phase having been conducted from 24
th
February, 2026 to 27 February, 2026. Steps have
been taken to minimise government services and
amenities in encroached areas, PDS services have
been reduced to once a week, the Animal Husbandry
department’s weekly immunization program in
encroached hamlets has been stopped, and no new
government services or infrastructure have been
37
sanctioned in such areas. Action has been taken
against 13 Anti-poaching Watchers/Protection
Watchers engaged through outsourcing agencies who
were found to be indulging in encroaching activities.
Now they have been terminated and all cultivations
covered under their encroachments have been
stopped. Notices under Section 68A of the Tamil
Nadu Forest Act, 1882 have been issued to 25
government officials verified to be in illegal
possession of forest land, and 16 hectares land has
been recovered from such officials. The District
Collector, Theni has been requested to initiate
disciplinary and legal action against 118 government
servants identified as encroachers. However, they
continue to hold on to the encroached forest areas.
These are measures that this Court acknowledges as
indicating that the State has begun to engage more
seriously with the recommendations of the CEC, and
they deserve to be recognised as steps in the right
direction.
53. In respect of the Kanyakumari Wildlife
Sanctuary, the State has submitted that a phased
eviction plan has been formulated in accordance with
the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 and
38
the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, with priority
accorded to ecologically sensitive areas and core
wildlife habitats. A comprehensive DGPS survey has
been proposed to resolve disputes regarding forest
boundary demarcation, and a District Level meeting
has been requested under the chairmanship of the
District Collector for evolving a coordinated inter-
departmental strategy for eviction. The State has also
acknowledged that certain civil amenities being
extended to inhabitants of encroached areas are
under review and that a proposal is under
consideration to gradually withdraw such facilities in
a phased manner.
C. Areas of Continuing Concern
54. Having taken note of the steps initiated, this
Court must now address the areas of continuing
concern that emerge from the record.
Notwithstanding the measures detailed above, the
overall pace and scale of compliance falls significantly
short of what the urgency and gravity of the situation
demands. In SMTR alone, only 66 out of 4,601
encroachers have been successfully relocated, and
even in respect of these 66 cases, the State has
acknowledged that the process of taking over
39
cultivation, buildings and other assets has not been
fully completed and continues to remain in
suspended animation, thereby permitting continued
illegal use of forest land and resources. Only 52.86
hectares out of 5,072.653 hectares under
encroachment has been effectively recovered. These
meagre figures, when viewed against the massive
scale of encroachment and the duration over which
this matter has been pending before various fora,
reflect a pace of progress that this Court finds
difficult to regard as commensurate with the gravity
of the situation.
55. The survey process again presents grave
concern. The drone survey, which is described by the
State as a precondition for the eviction process,
progresses at a rate of 3 sq. km. per day, leaving
210.07 sq. km. yet to be covered, with the aerial
survey alone estimated to require a minimum of 6
months, after which actual field demarcation will
require additional time. While this Court appreciates
the logistical challenges involved in surveying
difficult forest terrain, and acknowledges that the
drone survey represents a methodologically sound
approach to accurate boundary determination, it is
40
necessary to emphasise that such procedural
prerequisites, important as they are, cannot serve as
justifications for indefinite deferral of eviction action
in areas where boundaries are already clearly
established and legal proceedings have been
concluded in favour of the Forest Department. The
State must ensure that eviction operations proceed
simultaneously and without delay in such areas even
as the survey process continues in others.
56. This Court is also concerned by the material
placed on record which indicates that certain
government amenities and facilities continue to
remain functional within encroached forest areas.
The State has itself acknowledged that three PDS
shops continue to operate, albeit on a reduced basis,
in Arasaradi, Vandiyur and Nariyuthu hamlets, and
that six Anganwadi centres remain operational within
encroached forest areas. While the State has
indicated that a proposal for complete withdrawal of
such services is under consideration and that no new
services or infrastructure have been sanctioned, this
Court is of the view that the continued operation,
even on a limited basis, of such facilities within
encroached forest areas must be brought to an end
41
within a defined short timeframe. The extension of
government facilities to encroached areas, however
limited, inevitably legitimizes illegal occupation and
creates disincentives for voluntary relocation.
57.
The position regarding government employee
encroachers also requires close attention. The CEC
has identified 118 serving or retired government
employees as encroachers within SMTR. While the
State has initiated steps, including issuance of
notices and the recovery of 15 hectares from such
officials, the proceedings against a significant
number remain pending. Government employees
occupy a position of public trust, and encroachment
upon protected forest land by persons holding such
positions constitutes a particularly grave dereliction
of duty that warrants the most expeditious and
strong institutional response. The State must ensure
that disciplinary and legal proceedings against all
identified government employee encroachers are
pursued and concluded with the urgency that the
situation demands, without awaiting the outcome of
the broader eviction programme. Further, removal of
these encroachments is absolutely essential and
must be completed by the next date of listing.
42
58. In respect of the BBTCL issue, while this Court
acknowledges the significant progress made in
handing over 97.35% of the leased area to the Forest
Department, it cannot overlook the State’s disclosure
that significant permanent infrastructure, including
offices, bungalows, labour houses, religious
structures and associated buildings, belonging to the
BBTCL management are proposed to be left in place
as they are. This Court finds such a proposal difficult
to reconcile with the imperative of comprehensive
habitat restoration within the KMTR landscape. The
continued presence of permanent built infrastructure
within a Tiger Reserve, without any concrete plan or
timeline for its removal and ecological restoration, is
not consonant with the directions of this Court or the
recommendations of the CEC.
59. Further, the massive lease rent liability
computed against BBTC Ltd. amounting to Rs.
4,655,24,33,533.21 (Rupees Four Thousand Six
Hundred Fifty-Five Crore Twenty-Four Lakh Thirty-
Three Thousand Five Hundred Thirty-Three and
Paise Twenty-One only) remains to be recovered, and
the State must take expeditious steps in this regard
in accordance with the orders of the Madras High
43
Court. We expect to receive a compliance report in
this regard by next date. Further, we shall consider
the partial utilization of this amount towards the
Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and
Planning Authority (CAMPA) fund.
D. Legal Framework and Constitutional
Obligations
60. This Court has, in a catena of decisions,
consistently affirmed that the protection of wildlife,
forests and ecological systems constitutes not merely
a statutory obligation but a constitutional imperative
flowing from Articles 21, 48A and 51A(g) of the
Constitution of India. This Court in T.N.
2
Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India ,
emphasized the approach that conservation must be
eco-centric and not anthropocentric, recognising that
non-humans too have intrinsic value and that the
approach has to be nature centred where humans are
a part of nature. The Court further observed, with
reference to the principle of restitution and Article 8
of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992, that
constitutional Courts are duty-bound to ensure not
2
(2025) 2 SCC 641
44
only prevention and mitigation of environmental
degradation, but also restoration of damaged
ecosystems to the fullest extent possible, while
safeguarding against future ecological harm.
61.
The Agasthyamalai landscape is not merely
another protected area, it is a globally significant
biodiversity hotspot, home to flagship species
including the tiger, elephant, leopard, Indian Gaur
sloth bear, Nilgiri langur, Great Indian Hornbill, and
numerous other endangered species. The
Srivilliputhur-Megamalai Tiger Reserve has been
identified by the National Tiger Conservation
Authority as a critically affected tiger reserve, with
risks including occupation by the cotton-silk mafia,
commercial cattle grazing, and ganja cultivation. The
Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve constitutes the
critical catchment of the Thamirabarani River,
serving millions of people in southern Tamil Nadu,
and the CEC has recommended the restoration of
natural forest cover in this landscape as imperative
for maintaining biodiversity, water security, and
ecological balance.
62. The consequences of continued inaction are
therefore not limited to wildlife alone but extend to
45
water security, the livelihoods of millions of people
dependent on the river systems and the ecosystem
services generated by this landscape, and to India’s
obligations under international environmental law.
E. Rehabilitation and the Humanitarian
Dimension
63. This Court is fully alive to the humanitarian
dimension of the issues involved. A significant
number of the persons presently in occupation of
forest land within the Agasthyamalai landscape are
economically vulnerable, many have been resident in
these areas for extended periods, in some cases
spanning over eight decades, under circumstances
that were not entirely of their own making, including
dam construction workers who settled in forest areas
during infrastructure development activities, and
communities that migrated into forest areas during
severe drought conditions prevailing in the 1950s
and 1960s. The complexity of the rehabilitation task
is real and cannot be understated.
64. This Court is also conscious of the fact that
rehabilitation and eviction must proceed
simultaneously and in a coordinated manner, and
46
that no person should be displaced without adequate
alternative provision being made for their
resettlement. The approach of the State in
categorising encroachers, distinguishing between
those with permanent habitations and forest-
dependent livelihoods, those with temporary
structures, and those engaged only in agriculture,
provides a useful and rational framework for
prioritising and sequencing eviction and
rehabilitation operations. This Court endorses this
approach and expects the State to pursue it with
greater speed and rigour.
65. At the same time, this Court is of the considered
view that humanitarian considerations, important as
they are, cannot operate as a perpetual justification
for indefinite postponement of legally mandated
eviction and restoration measures. The obligation to
provide adequate rehabilitation is a legitimate and
important one, but it must be discharged in tandem
with, and not as a substitute for, the discharge of
environmental obligations. The approach of treating
complex issues in rehabilitation as excuses for
deferring eviction operations indefinitely, without any
47
concrete plan or enforceable timeline, cannot be
acknowledged in law.
V. DIRECTIONS
66. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is
of the opinion that, despite the steps taken by the
State, the matter requires a structured, time bound
and closely monitored framework to ensure effective
implementation and consequences for non-
compliance. The assurances and commitments made
in the reply affidavit must translate into concrete,
measurable and verifiable action on the ground
through effective monitoring, institutional
accountability and sustained enforcement.
Accordingly, we issue the following directions:
i. A time-bound, division-wise encroachment
eviction plan shall be prepared and implemented
on priority, with clearly defined timelines,
measurable milestones, and designated officer-
level responsibilities. The said plan shall be
placed before CEC within a period of one month.
ii. The eviction plan shall include comprehensive
measures for physical eviction, rehabilitation
wherever applicable, legal action against wilful
48
violators, and post-eviction ecological
restoration, so as to ensure that reclaimed forest
land is not re-encroached. Any failure to comply
with the approved plan shall invite
administrative accountability at the highest level.
iii. The State Law Department shall continuously
monitor all proceedings relating to
encroachments pending before district courts
and other judicial forums and take appropriate
measures for their expeditious disposal. The
status of all pending cases relating to the
encroachments before various forums shall be
submitted for perusal of this Court in a tabular
form supported by an affidavit on the next date
of hearing.
iv. Disciplinary and legal action shall be initiated
against all identified 118 Government servants
found to be encroachers, in accordance with Rule
3 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants’
Conduct Rules, 1973 and other applicable laws.
We further direct that the State Government
shall consider imposing additional penalties on
all present and former Government employees
found to be encroachers, and require such
49
persons to deposit appropriate environmental
restitution and restoration charges with the
Tamil Nadu State Compensatory Afforestation
Fund Management and Planning Authority
(CAMPA). The amounts so deposited shall be
maintained separately and utilised exclusively
for ecological restoration, habitat recovery,
afforestation, forest protection and related
conservation measures in the affected areas, in
accordance with the Compensatory Afforestation
Fund Act, 2016 and the Rules framed
thereunder.
v. A blanket moratorium shall be imposed on the
extension of welfare schemes, public utilities,
transport facilities, electricity supply, and
infrastructure support within encroached forest
areas, so as to ensure that illegal occupation is
neither incentivised nor legitimised.
vi. There shall be a complete prohibition on approval
or commencement of any new non-forestry
activity or diversion proposal within the entire
Agasthyamalai landscape under the provisions of
the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, until all
encroachments are removed and all illegal
50
infrastructure is dismantled or otherwise dealt
with strictly in accordance with extant law, rules
and regulations. Proposal for regularization, if
any, shall be placed before the CEC which shall
examine the same and submit its opinion to this
Court for further directions.
vii. Stringent disciplinary, penal, and criminal action
shall be proposed against all officials, officers,
and Heads of Departments who commenced,
facilitated, approved, or permitted illegal
infrastructure works within the forest areas,
specially within the Megamalai Wildlife
Sanctuary, and generally within the
Agasthyamalai Biosphere in violation of the
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. A
comprehensive status report regarding such
action shall be filed with the CEC within three
months.
viii. All Government establishments, facilities, and
unauthorised infrastructure situated within
forest areas, including within the Srivilliputhur–
Megamalai Tiger Reserve, shall be discontinued,
relocated, dismantled, and removed from forest
land within a period of six months.
51
ix. All illegal resorts, commercial establishments,
and tourism-related infrastructure operating
within the Megamalai area and other forest lands
shall be made non-operational forthwith and
dismantled in accordance with law and by
ensuring minimum disruption to the forest area.
All electricity connections and unauthorised
transmission lines servicing such
encroachments shall also be disconnected and
removed forthwith. The aforesaid procedure shall
be carried out in the supervision of the CEC.
x. The Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala, shall
ensure that all original maps, survey records,
settlement records, and land documents
pertaining to the Kanyakumari Wildlife
Sanctuary presently in Kerala’s custody are
transferred to the Tamil Nadu Forest Department
within three months. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu, shall coordinate with
the Government of Kerala to ensure expeditious
compliance.
xi. The Forest Survey of India (FSI) under the
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change (MoEFCC) shall undertake survey,
52
demarcation, geo-referencing, and digitisation of
the entire boundary of the Kalakkad
Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur–
Megamalai Tiger Reserve and the Kanyakumari
Wildlife Sanctuary within next six months. The
FSI will also map the encroachments and submit
its report to all concerned including the CEC.
xii. The State Government in consultation with the
CEC shall inspect and take an appropriate
decision regarding the utilisation, retention,
relocation, or removal of all buildings,
infrastructure, offices, bungalows, labour
quarters, religious structures, and other
establishments belonging to the management of
Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Limited
(BBTCL) proposed to be retained within the forest
area of Kalakkad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve.
xiii. All forest, police, revenue and/or other officials
involved in the exercise of survey, demarcation
and removal of encroachments pursuant to the
aforesaid directions shall be protected from
prosecution in relation to bona fide actions taken
by them during the aforesaid exercise, except in
53
cases involving mala fide, arbitrary action or
abuse of authority.
xiv. In case the State Government fails to ensure
compliance with the above directions, the CEC
may recommend deployment of paramilitary
forces for providing assistance to carry out the
exercise of removal of encroachments.
xv. The States shall submit monthly compliance
reports to the CEC. The CEC shall undertake
ground verification and submit quarterly status
reports before this Court until all directions are
fully complied with to the satisfaction of this
Court.
67. The CEC shall submit its report in a sealed
th st
cover by 28 August, 2026. List as part-heard on 1
September, 2026 for further hearing and
consideration.
….……………………J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
...…………………….J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
NEW DELHI;
MAY 29, 2026.
54