Godavaram Judgement

Background

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs. Union of India & Ors. is a landmark environmental case in India, which was first heard in the Supreme Court in 1996. The case is commonly known as the “Godavarman case.”

The case began as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad, a retired forest officer, in the Supreme Court of India. The petitioner had raised concerns about the degradation of forest lands due to various developmental activities, such as mining, quarrying, and construction, which were being carried out without proper environmental clearances.

The main issue in the case was whether forests in India could be diverted for non-forest purposes, and if so, under what conditions. The court held that forests could be diverted for non-forest purposes, but only under certain conditions and after obtaining necessary environmental clearances.

The case has been significant in shaping India’s environmental jurisprudence. The court has issued several orders and directions over the years to regulate developmental activities in forest areas and protect the environment. It has also set up several committees to monitor compliance with its orders.

The case is still ongoing, and the court continues to hear and issue directions on various environmental issues related to forests in India.

Legal and Regulatory Framework

• The Godavarman case primarily deals with the interpretation and implementation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (FCA) and the Forest (Conservation) Rules, 1981, which provide for the onservation of forests and the protection of wildlife in India.
• The FCA empowers the central government to declare any area as a “reserved forest” or “protected forest,” which prohibits any non-forest activity in the area. The act also requires the state governments to obtain prior approval from the central government before diverting any forest land for non-forest purposes. The FCA also has provisions for the eviction of illegal occupants and the restoration of degraded forests.
• In the Case, the Supreme Court of India interpreted the FCA and the Forest (Conservation) Rules, 1981, in a manner that gave a broad and expansive interpretation to the powers of the central government to regulate forest resources.
• The court held that the FCA was enacted to conserve forests and protect wildlife, and any diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes must be done strictly in accordance with the law and after due diligence. The court also held that the power of the central government under the FCA was not limited to the declared “reserved forests” or “protected forests,” but extended to all forests in India, whether on public or private land.
• The court further held that the principle of “sustainable development” must be followed in forest conservation and that the rights of forest dwellers and tribal communities must be protected while conserving forests. The court also issued several directives to the central and state governments to ensure that the forests were protected and conserved.

Analysis

1. The key issue in the Godavarman Case was the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes without obtaining the necessary approvals from the central government. The Supreme Court of India held that the FCA was enacted to conserve forests and protect wildlife, and any diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes must be made strictly in accordance with the law and after due diligence.
2. The court also held that the power of the central government under the FCA was not limited to the declared “reserved forests” or “protected forests.” Still, it extended to all forests in India, whether on public or private land.
3. The court emphasized the importance of sustainable development in forest conservation and highlighted the need to protect the rights of forest dwellers and tribal communities. The court issued several directives to the central and state governments to ensure that the forests were protected and conserved.

Impact of the Judgement

1. Strengthening of forest conservation laws:
   • The Godavarman Case has led to a stricter interpretation and implementation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and the Forest (Conservation) Rules, 1981, which provide for the conservation of forests and the protection of wildlife in India.
   • The case has highlighted the need to protect forests and has led to a greater focus on the rights of forest dwellers and tribal communities.
2. Increased role of the judiciary in environmental governance
   • It established the role of the judiciary as a watchdog in environmental governance.
   • The case has highlighted the importance of the judiciary in protecting the environment and has led to greater public scrutiny of environmental decisions.
3. Protection of forest lands
   • The Godavarman Case resulted in the protection of large areas of forest land in India.
   • The case has resulted in the cancellation of many projects that would have led to the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes.
   • This has helped to conserve India’s rich biodiversity and the ecosystem services provided by forests.
4. Recognition of the rights of forest dwellers and tribal communities
   • The Godavarman Case has emphasized the need to recognize and protect the rights of forest dwellers and tribal communities who depend on forests for their livelihoods.
   • The case has led to a greater focus on the implementation of the Forest Rights Act, which recognizes the rights of forest-dwelling communities and tribal groups over forest land and resources.
5. Promotion of sustainable development
   • The Godavarman Case has highlighted the importance of sustainable development in forest conservation.
   • The case has emphasized the need to balance the economic development needs of the country with the need to protect its natural resources.

Criticism of the Judgement

• The judgement has been criticized for its strict interpretation of forest conservation laws, arguing that it has hindered economic development and led to the displacement of communities.
• Role of the judiciary in environmental governance, arguing that it has led to delays in decision-making and project implementation.

Forest  (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023

Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha in March 2023.

Aim of introducing the Bill

• Primary aim of the proposed bill is to eliminate any uncertainty related to the Supreme Court’s ruling on Godavarman Case.
• It also aims to restrict the applicability of FCA as has been stated by Supreme Court in its earlier judgment. Supreme Court has earlier directed that the term ‘Forest’ should encompass not only the areas covered by forest in traditional sense but also any land recorded as forests in the governmental records, regardless of the ownership

Proposals

• The proposed bill aims to provide clarity on the definition of ‘FOREST’
• It aims to exempt certain types of forested lands including those
  • within a distance of 100 km along international borders or Line of Control (LOC) proposed to be used for the construction of strategic linear projects of national importance and concerning national security up to 10 hectares.
  • forests situated alongside a railway line or a public road maintained by the government of up to 0.10 hectares; tree plantation on private lands that are not categorized as forests from the requirement of obtaining prior forest clearance.

Criticism

• It raises concerns that this Bill if passed would potentially exclude significant forests in the Himalayan, Trans-Himalayan, and North Eastern regions from obtaining prior forest clearance. These areas are home to a diverse range of endemic species, and clearing them without proper assessment and mitigation plans could pose a threat to their biodiversity.
• Most of the forested area is already vulnerable to unsustainable infrastructure development and extreme weather events, and exempting them from forest clearance requirements would only increase their vulnerability.
• Forest rights groups argue that the exemptions it seeks to provide go against the Forest Rights Act of 2006. They claim that the bill is a continuation or previous exemptions granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, which have made it easier for government and private agencies to obtain forest diversions.
  • These previous exemptions, such as those linear projects, mineral prospecting, and forest diversion in areas without tribal populations, were illegal as they violated both the Forest Conservation Act and the Forest Rights Act.

The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023 has been referred to a 31-member Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for further deliberation. However, some concerns have been raised about why the bill was not referred to the Standing Committee instead.

It is essential that the JPC conducts public consultations and takes into account the concerns raised by various stakeholders. The recommendations made by the JPC must prioritise the conservation of forests and wildlife in the country and avoid any regressive changes that may pose a threat to the environment.