Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
2025 INSC 443
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SLP(CIVIL) NO(S). 999-1001 OF 2025
A. JOHN KENNEDY ETC. …PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU
AND OTHERS ETC. ...RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Mehta, J.
1. These petitions raise two important issues for our
consideration. The first being the preservation of Reserve Forests,
Wildlife Sanctuaries and Tiger Reserves in the State of Tamil Nadu
and the other being the claim of the petitioners, being the displaced
tea estate workers, claiming rehabilitation pursuant to their
eviction from an erstwhile tea estate by the name of Bombay
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2025.04.04
10:38:01 IST
Reason:
Burma Trading Corporation Limited [for short ‘BBTCL’] located in
Singampatti, Tamil Nadu, after the same was declared to be a
1
Reserved Forest, Wildlife Sanctuary and Tiger Reserve under the
provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 [for short ‘Wildlife
Act’]. The present petitioners had approached the High Court of
Madras by filing various writ petitions, seeking a direction for
providing them employment, rehabilitation, and compensation,
etc. Another set of writ petitions (Public Interest Litigations), which
were analogously heard, raised the important issues of restoration
of the degraded forest areas pursuant to their liberation from the
cultivations. All the writ petitions were disposed of/closed by the
rd
High Cour vide a common order dated 3 December, 2024, giving
general directions for the rehabilitation of the erstwhile tea estate
workers, leaving the issue of paramount importance, i.e.,
conservation and restoration of the forest areas inconclusive.
2. Needless to say, that the forests form the lungs of the
ecosystem, and any depletion/destruction of forest areas has a
direct impact on the entire environment. The world at large is facing
the calamities caused by the climate change, and the primary
culprit behind this is the depleting forest cover owing to a myriad of
issues including rapid urbanization, unchecked industrialization,
encroachments, etc.
2
3. This Court in the continuing mandamus of T.N.
Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India and Ors. (2006) 1
SCC 1 , has repeatedly issued mandatory directions to the States
and other authorities to ensure that the forest cover is
maintained/restored and any efforts to encroach thereupon are
dealt with by iron hands.
4. India has a forest cover of about 7,15,343 sq. km as per ‘India
State of Forest Report 2023’, which is about 21.76% (approx.) of the
total landmass of the country. Nepal has 44.74% (approx.), Bhutan
has 72% (approx.), and Sri Lanka has 29% (approx.) forest cover.
Hence, clearly the forest cover in India is not adequate and needs
to be enhanced. A recent report, submitted by the Ministry of
Environment and Forests, in proceedings before the National Green
Tribunal indicates that almost 13000 sq. kms. area of forests is
under encroachment. This Court has time and again taken up this
issue and passed mandatory directions to remove the
encroachments from the forest areas and to curb any attempt to
reduce the forest cover in the country.
5. In this context, we would like to quote the following excerpts
from this Court’s judgment in the case of State of Telangana and
3
Others v. Mohd. Abdul Qasim(Dead) Per LRs (2024) 6 SCC 461 ,
authored by Hon. M.M. Sundaresh, J. :-
“29 . Forests not only provide for and facilitate the sustenance
of life, but they also continue to protect and foster it. They
continue to tackle the ever-increasing carbon dioxide emissions
produced by humans in the name of development, while
striving to sustain all species. Despite the unblemished, selfless
and motherly service rendered by forests, man in his folly
continues with their destruction, unmindful of the fact that he
is inadvertently destroying himself.
30. Consequent to the advent of agriculture, man has destroyed
a significant portion of forests at his own peril. Forests serve
the Earth in a myriad of ways ranging from regulating carbon
emissions, aiding in soil conservation and regulating the water
cycle. Water being a life source, its availability for all life forms
is heavily dependent upon the aquifers created by forests.
Forests also play a pivotal role in controlling pollution, which
significantly affects the underprivileged, violating their right to
equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950. It
is the vulnerable sections of the society who would be most
affected by the depletion of forests, considering the fact that the
more affluent sections of society have better access to resources
as compared to them. Therefore, the protection of forests is in
the interest of mankind, even assuming that the other factors
can be ignored..[..].
31. There is a crying need for a change in our approach. Man
being an enlightened species, is expected to act as a trustee of
the Earth. It is his duty to ensure the preservation of the
ecosystem and to continuously endeavour towards the
protection of air, water and land. It is not his right to destroy
the habitat of other species but his duty to protect them from
further peril. A right to enjoy cannot be restricted to any specific
group, and so also to human beings. The time has come for
mankind to live sustainably and respect the rights of rivers,
lakes, beaches, estuaries, ridges, trees, mountains, seas and
air. It is imperative to do so as there is always a constant threat
to forests due to the ever-increasing population. Man is bound
by nature’s law. Therefore, the need of the hour is to transform
from an anthropocentric approach to ecocentric approach
which will encompass a wider perspective in the interest of the
environment.”
4
6. We, therefore, consider it necessary to take up the issues
relating to the removal of encroachments and restoration of the
forests which were left inconclusive by the High Court.
7. Background facts relevant and essential to the controversy
are noted hereinbelow.
8. The entire extent of Singampatti Zamin forest lands in the
State of Tamil Nadu, admeasuring an area of 3388.78 hectares,
were leased out by the then Zamindar to the BBTCL for a period of
th
over 99 years way back on 12 February, 1929. The lease holders
cleared out the forests area and started cultivating crops like tea,
coffee, along with various types of spices and rubber over the land
in question and this exploitation of the forest areas had been going
on unabatedly for more than 95 years.
9. The ‘Singampatti Zamin forests lands’ was declared to be a
rd
reserved forest vide Government Order [for short ‘GO’] dated 23
March, 1978. In the year 2007, the Government of Tamil Nadu
th
issued GOM No. 145 dated 28 December, 2007, whereby the entire
area covered by the tea estate was declared to be a ‘Core Critical
Tiger Habitat’. In the year 2012, the Government issued another
th
GOM Nos. E & F dated 12 August, 2012, notifying the entire area
as a Wildlife Sanctuary and a Tiger Reserve under the provisions of
5
the Wildlife Act. The lands in question were declared to be a part of
th
Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Reserve Forest on 28 February, 2018.
10. The BBTCL assailed the said declarations in Writ Petition No.
16921 of 2014, which is still pending consideration.
11. We are informed that there are more such tea estates in the
State of Tamil Nadu which were allotted for cultivations by the
erstwhile Zamindars by changing the nature of forest lands to
revenue lands.
12. Concurrently, a batch of writ petitions came to be filed in the
High Court of Madras, some of which were in the nature of Public
Interest Litigations relating to forest issues, while others pertained
to the claims of the displaced tea estate workers to protect their
livelihood and rights to rehabilitation, compensation and re-
employment pursuant to their dislodgement from the tea estate. In
the Public Interest Litigations [i.e., Writ Petition (MD) Nos. 16381 of
2024, 16501 of 2024, 19108 of 2024 and 24693 of 2024], a specific
prayer was made to restore the entire forest area lands, which had
been destroyed on account of plantation activities. All the above
writ petitions were clubbed and taken up together by the High
Court.
6
13. In these proceedings, a status report was filed by the Deputy
Director and Wildlife Warden of the Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger
nd
Reserve, stating therein that the Government vide GOM dated 2
January, 2018, has declared an area to the extent of 22979.19
hectares to be a reserve forest under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu
Forests Act, 1882 [for short the ‘Act’], which includes 3388.78
hectares area leased to BBTCL. This declaration was made after
following the due process of law as provided under the TN Forest
Act, taking into consideration the various claims made under the
Act. It was also stated in the said affidavit that as per Section 2 of
the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, prior approval of the
Government of India is required for assigning use of forest land for
non-forestry purposes, by way of lease or otherwise to any private
person, or to any authority, corporation, agency or other
organization. The entire area leased out to the tea estate by the
former Zamindar of Singampatti forest lands forms the core of the
Kalakkad- Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve and has been declared as
th
‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ vide GO No. 145 dated 28 December,
2007, issued by Environment & Forests Department, Government
of India.
7
14. It was further mentioned that preserving the said area is
critical for the survival and well-being of the entire eco-system. The
reserve forest is a very critical component and forms the catchment
area of a perennial river in the State of Tamil Nadu, namely,
“Thamirabarai”. Any disturbance to the eco-system would have
adverse consequences to the water supply as well as the
environment of the area in question, thereby affecting millions of
people living in the adjoining districts of Tirunelveli and
Thoothukudi, etc. It was emphasized in the affidavit that
restoration of the forests, on previously leased out lands put to
cultivation use, was of utmost importance to maintain the
ecological balance.
15. The affidavit also mentions that most of the plantation
workers, who were seeking reliefs in the writ petitions, were
outsiders comprising of the migratory population and thus, they
were not falling within the definition of ‘traditional forest dwellers.’
The affidavit reiterates and reaffirms that the entire area of
Singampatti village, including the area leased-out to the BBTC,
has been declared as a reserved forest vide GO (M.S.) No. 03 dated
th
12 January, 2018.
8
16. The Division Bench of the High Court referred to an earlier
judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. M. Sundresh (as His
Lordship then was), in the case of Bombay Burma Trading
Corporation Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors .
(2018) 1 CTC 733 , wherein extensive directions (quoted below),
were given to the Government to preserve and restore the forest
area:-
“39. The area in issue is pristine forest area. It has rich
biodiversity and it must be preserved at least for the future
generations. It accommodates river sanctuary. There flow
14 rivers in the Agasthyamalai landscape. The area must
be protected as it is. Therefore, keeping in mind the climate
change and its effect, every human being in the world has
to ensure the preservation of eco system and to
continuously endeavour towards protection of air, water
and land.”
17. It is, in this background, and considering the importance of
restoration of the forest areas in the entire Agasthyamalai
landscape, we requested learned Solicitor General Shri Tushar
Mehta and Shri K. Parameshwar, Senior Advocate, who appears as
Amicus Curiae in the forest related matters, to assist the Court in
this matter.
18. On the previous date of hearing, Shri Tushar Mehta, learned
Solicitor General, submitted that the Central Government is
committed to conservation and restoration of forest areas and shall
9
unreservedly comply with all directions which may be issued by
this Court to secure this objective.
19. Shri K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae pointed out that
the region in question is an important biodiversity hotspot in the
Western Ghats, comprising a part of the Agasthyamalai Biosphere
Reserve. He drew the Court’s attention to para 4 of the judgment
in Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. ( supra ) which is
quoted as under:-
“4. Biosphere Reserve (BR) is a representative part of natural
and cultural landscapes extending over large area of
terrestrial or coastal/marine ecosystem or a combination
thereof. Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve forms the core
zone of Agasthiyarmalai Biosphere Reserve. In the 4th World
Congress of Biosphere Reserves, Agasthyamala Biosphere
Reserve has been declared as World Biosphere Reserve
taking note of its cultural and ecological diversity.
Agasthyamala Biosphere Reserve is included in the World
Network of Biosphere Reserve under the Man and Biosphere
(MAB) Program of UNESCO in the 28th Session of
International Coordinating Council held in Lima, Peru from
18th to 19th March, 2016.”
20. Shri Parameshwar referred to topography of the
Agasthyamalai landscape, which includes within its ambit the
Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel
Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife
Sanctuaries . He pointed out that the High Court of Madras in the
afore-quoted judgment of 2018, has recognized this entire area as
crucial to elephant conservation in Southern India. He urged that
10
the High Court has already issued a mandate to evacuate the tea
estate workers from the critical forest areas which have to be
maintained as pristine forests and no commercial activities,
including ecotourism cultivation, etc. can be permitted on these
lands. He further submitted that significant part of the
encroachment is owing to the illegal cultivation of silk cotton being
carried out by the unscrupulous elements in the core forest areas.
21. However, it was the contention of learned Amicus Curiae that
with the efflux of time, these directions have lost their edge and
have become inadequate for meaningful restoration and
rehabilitation of the Agasthyamalai landscape. He urged that it is
imperative that a scientific survey should be carried out for
determining the boundaries of all the forest areas in the
Agasthyamalai landscape and to identify the extent of
encroachments prevailing thereupon. As per Shri Parmeshwar,
only after the forest areas are identified and distinctly demarcated,
measures required to restore and rejuvenate the forest areas which
are extensively being depleted owing to systematic encroachments
and exploitation by cultivated plantations, going on for almost one
century, can be set in motion. The forest boundaries need to be
secured, preceded by a scientific survey, which should include
11
Satellite Imagery by Remote Sensing methods and Geo-Mapping of
the entire area failing which the objective of establishing the tiger
reserves i.e., ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ and having a healthy tiger
population in the said reserve forests can never be achieved. He
referred to the following observations made by this Court in T.N.
Godavarman Thirumalpad (2025) 2 SCC 641 and urged that a
healthy tiger population is crucial to the health of the forests and
that a ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ merits the highest level of
protection. The same is reproduced hereinbelow:
“The tiger perishes without the forest and the forest perishes
without its tigers. Therefore, the tiger should stand guard over
the forest and the forest should protect all its tigers.” This is
how the importance of the tigers in the ecosystem has been
succinctly described in ‘Mahabharta’. The existence of the
forest is necessary for the protection of tigers. In turn, if the
tiger is protected, the ecosystem which revolves around him is
also protected. The tiger represents the apex of the animal
pyramid and the protection of their habitat must be a priority.
“A healthy tiger population is an indicator of sustainable
development in the 13 tiger range countries.”
22. Learned Amicus Curiae prayed that the Central Empowered
Committee (‘CEC’) constituted under the directions of this Court
may be asked to conduct an extensive survey of the entire
landscape and to give its suggestions for restoration of the pristine
forest ecosystem.
23. Shri Parmeshwar further submitted that the CEC may be
assigned the task of surveying the entire Agasthyamalai landscape
12
so as to find out the extent of encroachments, if any, existing in
these areas including the critical tiger reserves; to give a report
regarding non-forestry activities (including any kind of cultivation)
in and around the reserved forest areas.
24. He urged that the concerned authorities of the State may be
mandated to stop the Government facilities and to remove all
infrastructures including fair price shops, schools, Anganwadi,
banks, water supplies, roads, bridges, transport facilities, etc.
being provided in these reserved forest areas.
25. He also submitted that this Court may be pleased to provide
protection to the forest personnel from malicious prosecutions in
which they are frequently being entangled during the eviction
proceedings; and to direct the local administration and police
authorities to provide support and protection to the forest
personnel during the eviction process.
26. Shri P.S. Raman, learned Advocate General appearing for the
State of Tamil Nadu, submitted that the State Government is
committed to ensure that no part of the reserve forest areas is
encroached upon and that the entire area of the Agasthyamalai
landscape which includes reserved forests referred to , are
supra
freed from encroachments and restored to their original form. He
13
urged that the State Government has already taken proactive
initiatives to ensure removal of encroachments, restoration of the
forests and rehabilitation of the tea estate workers. The process for
restoration of the Singampatti Zamin area as a forest area has
already been commenced and the task of relocating and
rehabilitation of the workers is complete. He assured that the
State Government shall provide all support to the CEC in the
process of survey, as may be directed by this Court.
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.
14
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 Agsthyamalai landscape, including the above-
mentioned 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.
30. The concerned officials of the State Government including the
District Administration, the Police Administration and the forest
officials of each district involved shall be responsible for providing
all required assistance and support to the CEC for completing the
process of survey.
31. Twelve weeks’ time is granted to the CEC for completing this
exercise.
th
32. The matter shall be listed on 15 July, 2025, for receiving the
report of the CEC and for further directions.
15
33. The issues relating to rehabilitation of the workers shall be
nd
considered on 22 April, 2025.
nd
34. List on 22 April, 2025.
……………………………J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
……………………………J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
NEW DELHI;
MARCH 24, 2025.
16
2025 INSC 443
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SLP(CIVIL) NO(S). 999-1001 OF 2025
A. JOHN KENNEDY ETC. …PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU
AND OTHERS ETC. ...RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Mehta, J.
1. These petitions raise two important issues for our
consideration. The first being the preservation of Reserve Forests,
Wildlife Sanctuaries and Tiger Reserves in the State of Tamil Nadu
and the other being the claim of the petitioners, being the displaced
tea estate workers, claiming rehabilitation pursuant to their
eviction from an erstwhile tea estate by the name of Bombay
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2025.04.04
10:38:01 IST
Reason:
Burma Trading Corporation Limited [for short ‘BBTCL’] located in
Singampatti, Tamil Nadu, after the same was declared to be a
1
Reserved Forest, Wildlife Sanctuary and Tiger Reserve under the
provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 [for short ‘Wildlife
Act’]. The present petitioners had approached the High Court of
Madras by filing various writ petitions, seeking a direction for
providing them employment, rehabilitation, and compensation,
etc. Another set of writ petitions (Public Interest Litigations), which
were analogously heard, raised the important issues of restoration
of the degraded forest areas pursuant to their liberation from the
cultivations. All the writ petitions were disposed of/closed by the
rd
High Cour vide a common order dated 3 December, 2024, giving
general directions for the rehabilitation of the erstwhile tea estate
workers, leaving the issue of paramount importance, i.e.,
conservation and restoration of the forest areas inconclusive.
2. Needless to say, that the forests form the lungs of the
ecosystem, and any depletion/destruction of forest areas has a
direct impact on the entire environment. The world at large is facing
the calamities caused by the climate change, and the primary
culprit behind this is the depleting forest cover owing to a myriad of
issues including rapid urbanization, unchecked industrialization,
encroachments, etc.
2
3. This Court in the continuing mandamus of T.N.
Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India and Ors. (2006) 1
SCC 1 , has repeatedly issued mandatory directions to the States
and other authorities to ensure that the forest cover is
maintained/restored and any efforts to encroach thereupon are
dealt with by iron hands.
4. India has a forest cover of about 7,15,343 sq. km as per ‘India
State of Forest Report 2023’, which is about 21.76% (approx.) of the
total landmass of the country. Nepal has 44.74% (approx.), Bhutan
has 72% (approx.), and Sri Lanka has 29% (approx.) forest cover.
Hence, clearly the forest cover in India is not adequate and needs
to be enhanced. A recent report, submitted by the Ministry of
Environment and Forests, in proceedings before the National Green
Tribunal indicates that almost 13000 sq. kms. area of forests is
under encroachment. This Court has time and again taken up this
issue and passed mandatory directions to remove the
encroachments from the forest areas and to curb any attempt to
reduce the forest cover in the country.
5. In this context, we would like to quote the following excerpts
from this Court’s judgment in the case of State of Telangana and
3
Others v. Mohd. Abdul Qasim(Dead) Per LRs (2024) 6 SCC 461 ,
authored by Hon. M.M. Sundaresh, J. :-
“29 . Forests not only provide for and facilitate the sustenance
of life, but they also continue to protect and foster it. They
continue to tackle the ever-increasing carbon dioxide emissions
produced by humans in the name of development, while
striving to sustain all species. Despite the unblemished, selfless
and motherly service rendered by forests, man in his folly
continues with their destruction, unmindful of the fact that he
is inadvertently destroying himself.
30. Consequent to the advent of agriculture, man has destroyed
a significant portion of forests at his own peril. Forests serve
the Earth in a myriad of ways ranging from regulating carbon
emissions, aiding in soil conservation and regulating the water
cycle. Water being a life source, its availability for all life forms
is heavily dependent upon the aquifers created by forests.
Forests also play a pivotal role in controlling pollution, which
significantly affects the underprivileged, violating their right to
equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950. It
is the vulnerable sections of the society who would be most
affected by the depletion of forests, considering the fact that the
more affluent sections of society have better access to resources
as compared to them. Therefore, the protection of forests is in
the interest of mankind, even assuming that the other factors
can be ignored..[..].
31. There is a crying need for a change in our approach. Man
being an enlightened species, is expected to act as a trustee of
the Earth. It is his duty to ensure the preservation of the
ecosystem and to continuously endeavour towards the
protection of air, water and land. It is not his right to destroy
the habitat of other species but his duty to protect them from
further peril. A right to enjoy cannot be restricted to any specific
group, and so also to human beings. The time has come for
mankind to live sustainably and respect the rights of rivers,
lakes, beaches, estuaries, ridges, trees, mountains, seas and
air. It is imperative to do so as there is always a constant threat
to forests due to the ever-increasing population. Man is bound
by nature’s law. Therefore, the need of the hour is to transform
from an anthropocentric approach to ecocentric approach
which will encompass a wider perspective in the interest of the
environment.”
4
6. We, therefore, consider it necessary to take up the issues
relating to the removal of encroachments and restoration of the
forests which were left inconclusive by the High Court.
7. Background facts relevant and essential to the controversy
are noted hereinbelow.
8. The entire extent of Singampatti Zamin forest lands in the
State of Tamil Nadu, admeasuring an area of 3388.78 hectares,
were leased out by the then Zamindar to the BBTCL for a period of
th
over 99 years way back on 12 February, 1929. The lease holders
cleared out the forests area and started cultivating crops like tea,
coffee, along with various types of spices and rubber over the land
in question and this exploitation of the forest areas had been going
on unabatedly for more than 95 years.
9. The ‘Singampatti Zamin forests lands’ was declared to be a
rd
reserved forest vide Government Order [for short ‘GO’] dated 23
March, 1978. In the year 2007, the Government of Tamil Nadu
th
issued GOM No. 145 dated 28 December, 2007, whereby the entire
area covered by the tea estate was declared to be a ‘Core Critical
Tiger Habitat’. In the year 2012, the Government issued another
th
GOM Nos. E & F dated 12 August, 2012, notifying the entire area
as a Wildlife Sanctuary and a Tiger Reserve under the provisions of
5
the Wildlife Act. The lands in question were declared to be a part of
th
Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Reserve Forest on 28 February, 2018.
10. The BBTCL assailed the said declarations in Writ Petition No.
16921 of 2014, which is still pending consideration.
11. We are informed that there are more such tea estates in the
State of Tamil Nadu which were allotted for cultivations by the
erstwhile Zamindars by changing the nature of forest lands to
revenue lands.
12. Concurrently, a batch of writ petitions came to be filed in the
High Court of Madras, some of which were in the nature of Public
Interest Litigations relating to forest issues, while others pertained
to the claims of the displaced tea estate workers to protect their
livelihood and rights to rehabilitation, compensation and re-
employment pursuant to their dislodgement from the tea estate. In
the Public Interest Litigations [i.e., Writ Petition (MD) Nos. 16381 of
2024, 16501 of 2024, 19108 of 2024 and 24693 of 2024], a specific
prayer was made to restore the entire forest area lands, which had
been destroyed on account of plantation activities. All the above
writ petitions were clubbed and taken up together by the High
Court.
6
13. In these proceedings, a status report was filed by the Deputy
Director and Wildlife Warden of the Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger
nd
Reserve, stating therein that the Government vide GOM dated 2
January, 2018, has declared an area to the extent of 22979.19
hectares to be a reserve forest under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu
Forests Act, 1882 [for short the ‘Act’], which includes 3388.78
hectares area leased to BBTCL. This declaration was made after
following the due process of law as provided under the TN Forest
Act, taking into consideration the various claims made under the
Act. It was also stated in the said affidavit that as per Section 2 of
the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, prior approval of the
Government of India is required for assigning use of forest land for
non-forestry purposes, by way of lease or otherwise to any private
person, or to any authority, corporation, agency or other
organization. The entire area leased out to the tea estate by the
former Zamindar of Singampatti forest lands forms the core of the
Kalakkad- Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve and has been declared as
th
‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ vide GO No. 145 dated 28 December,
2007, issued by Environment & Forests Department, Government
of India.
7
14. It was further mentioned that preserving the said area is
critical for the survival and well-being of the entire eco-system. The
reserve forest is a very critical component and forms the catchment
area of a perennial river in the State of Tamil Nadu, namely,
“Thamirabarai”. Any disturbance to the eco-system would have
adverse consequences to the water supply as well as the
environment of the area in question, thereby affecting millions of
people living in the adjoining districts of Tirunelveli and
Thoothukudi, etc. It was emphasized in the affidavit that
restoration of the forests, on previously leased out lands put to
cultivation use, was of utmost importance to maintain the
ecological balance.
15. The affidavit also mentions that most of the plantation
workers, who were seeking reliefs in the writ petitions, were
outsiders comprising of the migratory population and thus, they
were not falling within the definition of ‘traditional forest dwellers.’
The affidavit reiterates and reaffirms that the entire area of
Singampatti village, including the area leased-out to the BBTC,
has been declared as a reserved forest vide GO (M.S.) No. 03 dated
th
12 January, 2018.
8
16. The Division Bench of the High Court referred to an earlier
judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. M. Sundresh (as His
Lordship then was), in the case of Bombay Burma Trading
Corporation Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors .
(2018) 1 CTC 733 , wherein extensive directions (quoted below),
were given to the Government to preserve and restore the forest
area:-
“39. The area in issue is pristine forest area. It has rich
biodiversity and it must be preserved at least for the future
generations. It accommodates river sanctuary. There flow
14 rivers in the Agasthyamalai landscape. The area must
be protected as it is. Therefore, keeping in mind the climate
change and its effect, every human being in the world has
to ensure the preservation of eco system and to
continuously endeavour towards protection of air, water
and land.”
17. It is, in this background, and considering the importance of
restoration of the forest areas in the entire Agasthyamalai
landscape, we requested learned Solicitor General Shri Tushar
Mehta and Shri K. Parameshwar, Senior Advocate, who appears as
Amicus Curiae in the forest related matters, to assist the Court in
this matter.
18. On the previous date of hearing, Shri Tushar Mehta, learned
Solicitor General, submitted that the Central Government is
committed to conservation and restoration of forest areas and shall
9
unreservedly comply with all directions which may be issued by
this Court to secure this objective.
19. Shri K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae pointed out that
the region in question is an important biodiversity hotspot in the
Western Ghats, comprising a part of the Agasthyamalai Biosphere
Reserve. He drew the Court’s attention to para 4 of the judgment
in Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. ( supra ) which is
quoted as under:-
“4. Biosphere Reserve (BR) is a representative part of natural
and cultural landscapes extending over large area of
terrestrial or coastal/marine ecosystem or a combination
thereof. Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve forms the core
zone of Agasthiyarmalai Biosphere Reserve. In the 4th World
Congress of Biosphere Reserves, Agasthyamala Biosphere
Reserve has been declared as World Biosphere Reserve
taking note of its cultural and ecological diversity.
Agasthyamala Biosphere Reserve is included in the World
Network of Biosphere Reserve under the Man and Biosphere
(MAB) Program of UNESCO in the 28th Session of
International Coordinating Council held in Lima, Peru from
18th to 19th March, 2016.”
20. Shri Parameshwar referred to topography of the
Agasthyamalai landscape, which includes within its ambit the
Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel
Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife
Sanctuaries . He pointed out that the High Court of Madras in the
afore-quoted judgment of 2018, has recognized this entire area as
crucial to elephant conservation in Southern India. He urged that
10
the High Court has already issued a mandate to evacuate the tea
estate workers from the critical forest areas which have to be
maintained as pristine forests and no commercial activities,
including ecotourism cultivation, etc. can be permitted on these
lands. He further submitted that significant part of the
encroachment is owing to the illegal cultivation of silk cotton being
carried out by the unscrupulous elements in the core forest areas.
21. However, it was the contention of learned Amicus Curiae that
with the efflux of time, these directions have lost their edge and
have become inadequate for meaningful restoration and
rehabilitation of the Agasthyamalai landscape. He urged that it is
imperative that a scientific survey should be carried out for
determining the boundaries of all the forest areas in the
Agasthyamalai landscape and to identify the extent of
encroachments prevailing thereupon. As per Shri Parmeshwar,
only after the forest areas are identified and distinctly demarcated,
measures required to restore and rejuvenate the forest areas which
are extensively being depleted owing to systematic encroachments
and exploitation by cultivated plantations, going on for almost one
century, can be set in motion. The forest boundaries need to be
secured, preceded by a scientific survey, which should include
11
Satellite Imagery by Remote Sensing methods and Geo-Mapping of
the entire area failing which the objective of establishing the tiger
reserves i.e., ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ and having a healthy tiger
population in the said reserve forests can never be achieved. He
referred to the following observations made by this Court in T.N.
Godavarman Thirumalpad (2025) 2 SCC 641 and urged that a
healthy tiger population is crucial to the health of the forests and
that a ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ merits the highest level of
protection. The same is reproduced hereinbelow:
“The tiger perishes without the forest and the forest perishes
without its tigers. Therefore, the tiger should stand guard over
the forest and the forest should protect all its tigers.” This is
how the importance of the tigers in the ecosystem has been
succinctly described in ‘Mahabharta’. The existence of the
forest is necessary for the protection of tigers. In turn, if the
tiger is protected, the ecosystem which revolves around him is
also protected. The tiger represents the apex of the animal
pyramid and the protection of their habitat must be a priority.
“A healthy tiger population is an indicator of sustainable
development in the 13 tiger range countries.”
22. Learned Amicus Curiae prayed that the Central Empowered
Committee (‘CEC’) constituted under the directions of this Court
may be asked to conduct an extensive survey of the entire
landscape and to give its suggestions for restoration of the pristine
forest ecosystem.
23. Shri Parmeshwar further submitted that the CEC may be
assigned the task of surveying the entire Agasthyamalai landscape
12
so as to find out the extent of encroachments, if any, existing in
these areas including the critical tiger reserves; to give a report
regarding non-forestry activities (including any kind of cultivation)
in and around the reserved forest areas.
24. He urged that the concerned authorities of the State may be
mandated to stop the Government facilities and to remove all
infrastructures including fair price shops, schools, Anganwadi,
banks, water supplies, roads, bridges, transport facilities, etc.
being provided in these reserved forest areas.
25. He also submitted that this Court may be pleased to provide
protection to the forest personnel from malicious prosecutions in
which they are frequently being entangled during the eviction
proceedings; and to direct the local administration and police
authorities to provide support and protection to the forest
personnel during the eviction process.
26. Shri P.S. Raman, learned Advocate General appearing for the
State of Tamil Nadu, submitted that the State Government is
committed to ensure that no part of the reserve forest areas is
encroached upon and that the entire area of the Agasthyamalai
landscape which includes reserved forests referred to , are
supra
freed from encroachments and restored to their original form. He
13
urged that the State Government has already taken proactive
initiatives to ensure removal of encroachments, restoration of the
forests and rehabilitation of the tea estate workers. The process for
restoration of the Singampatti Zamin area as a forest area has
already been commenced and the task of relocating and
rehabilitation of the workers is complete. He assured that the
State Government shall provide all support to the CEC in the
process of survey, as may be directed by this Court.
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.
14
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 Agsthyamalai landscape, including the above-
mentioned 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.
30. The concerned officials of the State Government including the
District Administration, the Police Administration and the forest
officials of each district involved shall be responsible for providing
all required assistance and support to the CEC for completing the
process of survey.
31. Twelve weeks’ time is granted to the CEC for completing this
exercise.
th
32. The matter shall be listed on 15 July, 2025, for receiving the
report of the CEC and for further directions.
15
33. The issues relating to rehabilitation of the workers shall be
nd
considered on 22 April, 2025.
nd
34. List on 22 April, 2025.
……………………………J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
……………………………J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
NEW DELHI;
MARCH 24, 2025.
16