Complying with SC order, Centre makes ‘deemed’ forest reports public

The order had come on a petition challenging the 2023 amendment to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. FCA makes it mandatory for anyone to seek a government clearance for using any forest land for non-forest purposes. One of the main provisions of the 2023 amendment said that FCA would be applicable only on land that was notified as forest in government records. This went against a 1996 order of the Supreme Court in which it had clarified that FCA applied to not just notified forest land, but any land that was forest according to the dictionary meaning.

The expert committees, which were formed in pursuance of the 1996 order, were supposed to identify ‘deemed’ forests which were forests “as per dictionary meaning”, irrespective of their notification, recognition or ownership status. The reports of the expert committees were, however, never made public.

In its February 19 order, the Supreme Court said the states must continue to follow the dictionary meaning of forests for applying FCA for the time being, and asked the Environment Ministry to submit the reports of all the expert committees, which has now been done.

However, details of the reports showed that most states had only provided broad data on such deemed forests without details of their boundaries or exact locations. In fact, some states like West Bengal have not provided any details in their expert committee reports.

One of the key concerns raised in the challenge to the amendment of FCA, 1980 is that it excludes 1.97 lakh sq km of deemed forests. Some states, like Uttarakhand, have provided data dating before the state’s formation and only under broad categories such as forest areas controlled by “government, individuals, degraded and plantations”. Arunachal Pradesh, on the other hand, said that 61.7% of forest in the state was unclassed state forest and added that an “extensive field study” supported by satellite imageries and ground-truthing was required.

Goa’s expert committee report was among the few that provided data such as survey numbers, forest range, beat and polygon details.

The nature and details of the report seem to run contrary to the government’s submission to a joint parliamentary committee (JPC) of the Lok Sabha, in which the ministry said that “deemed forests, identified by the expert committees of the states, have been taken on record and hence the provision of the Act will be applicable in such lands also”.

Prakriti Srivastava, a retired Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer and a petitioner in the plea before the SC, said that the claims made by the government before the JPC appear to be misleading in light of the details emerging from the forest reports. “Without information about the boundaries and locations of the deemed forest areas, how has the government ensured its protection,” Srivastava asked.

A ministry source said that the reports have been made public as per court’s directives and they have not been examined yet.