The New Delhi Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the decks for the Assam government to go ahead with removal of unauthorized encroachments from over 360,000 hectares of forest land, affirming the process developed by the state to evict encroachers from reserved forests while ensuring procedural safeguards.
The apex court confirmed the plan to release 360,000 hectares of occupied land in AssamA bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe noted that acquisition of forest land has emerged as one of the most serious challenges facing the country’s environmental governance and said the Constitution has placed a “clear and unequivocal obligation” on the state to protect forests through legal and environmental means — though.
“These appeals raise a question of considerable constitutional and environmental significance, namely the obligation of the State to protect reserved forests in fulfillment of its constitutional mandate and such obligation must be fulfilled while ensuring sustainable human habitation within the forest,” the bench noted.
To be sure, the eviction drives that began last year have drawn sharp criticism from civil society and a section of opposition parties that the exercise disproportionately targets the Bengali-speaking Muslim community living in and around forest areas. Tensions peaked in Goalpara district in July, where protests against an eviction drive turned violent, leading to alleged police firing that killed a 19-year-old Muslim youth and injured several others, including security personnel.
The judgment came in a batch of appeals and writ petitions filed by residents of villages located within Assam’s Doang, Dakshin Nom, Yamuna Madunga, Barpani, Lutumai and Gola Ghat Reserve Forests. The petitioners claimed that they and their predecessors have been living in the area for more than 70 years and their occupation has been recognized by the state by issuing them Aadhaar cards, ration cards and other identification documents.
More Read
The Government of Assam, however, maintained that the land occupied by the petitioners fell within the reserved forest notified as early as 1887-88 and that the occupants had no legal right to occupy. It submitted information before the court showing that approximately 3,62,082 hectares of forest land, which is about 19.92% of the total forest area of the state, was vacant, leading to large-scale expansion of forest land for residential and agricultural use and severe environmental degradation.
The eviction notice issued by the forest department, which gave only seven days to the occupiers to vacate, was challenged in the Gauhati High Court on grounds of arbitrariness and violation of natural justice. Last year, while a single judge initially extended the deadline, a division bench later directed the state to frame regulations and issue show-cause notices, allowing time for explanations before eviction. That order was challenged in the Supreme Court.
Emphasizing the ecological importance of forests, the Supreme Court noted that forests are not just land or timber reserves but “complex ecosystems essential for maintaining ecological balance”, which play an important role in climate regulation, biodiversity conservation, groundwater recharge and climate change mitigation.
More Read
At the same time, the bench stressed on maintaining a balance between environmental protection and the rule of law. “The Constitution does not envisage a choice between environmental protection and the rule of law; rather, it insists on the co-existence and reinforcement of each other,” the judgment said.
After hearing the parties, including Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the court took note of a policy framework submitted by the state outlining the procedure for eviction. Under the sanctioned system, a committee consisting of forest and revenue officers will issue notices to the alleged squatters, give them an opportunity to produce documents to establish their rights and determine whether the land in question falls within notified forest areas. If possession is established, a speaking order will be passed, followed by a 15-day notice period before eviction.
Where the occupants are found outside the notified forest limits but within the revenue land, the matter will be referred to the revenue department for further action. The court also clarified that encroachment by gaon panchayats within forest areas would be permissible only if supported by records under the Jamabandi Register or the Forest Rights Act.
Finding that the state’s proposed action had “adequate procedural safeguards”, the bench said the process conformed to the principles of fairness, reasonableness and due process. The Solicitor General assured the court that the policy would be implemented objectively and fairly.
The court directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the currently occupied land till a speech order is passed and the notice period expires. It clarified that it expressed no opinion on the merits of individual claims, which would be examined by the Committee as per law.
