LI Network
Published on: 29 January, 2024 at 12:15 IST
The Supreme Court has upheld the forest identification criteria set by the State of Goa, dismissing challenges to its adequacy and validity.
The bench, comprising Justice BR Gavai, Justice Aravind Kumar, and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, emphasized that any alteration to the existing criteria would adversely impact ongoing conservation efforts.
The case revolved around the criteria established by the State of Goa for identifying ‘forests,’ dating back to guidelines issued in 1991 after the Bombay High Court judgment in Shivanand Salgaocar v. Tree Officer & Ors.
Committees were formed to identify private forests, applying criteria such as minimum area, proximity to larger forest areas, crop composition, and crown density. Legal challenges emerged regarding the application of these criteria, leading to various committees and subsequent litigation.
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) rejected applications challenging the criteria, prompting an appeal. In a related matter, the Supreme Court directed the State not to issue ‘No Objection Certificates’ for conversion of plots with specific natural vegetation characteristics.
The Supreme Court concluded the following:
i. The existing criteria for private forest identification in Goa are adequate and valid, requiring no alteration. The Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change guidelines, along with the Forest Rights Act, 2006, exempt areas less than 1 hectare with fewer than 75 trees from the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. Any change in criteria would encompass agricultural plantations, placing them under the ‘private forest’ category, necessitating government permission for minor developments.
ii. The appellant’s attempt to take a contradictory stand on forest identification criteria was noted. While challenging the Sawant and Karapurkar Committees’ criteria for identifying private forests, the appellant relied on the same criteria before the Tribunal. The court rejected this dual stance, emphasizing the appellant’s failure to support its arguments.
iii. The court explicitly delegated the task of identifying forest areas to Expert Committees constituted by State Governments, recognizing the lack of uniform criteria across the country.
In light of these findings, the appeals were rejected.
Case Title: TN Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India
