Supreme Court upholds Elephant Corridor order
The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the Madras High Court order removing all commercial activities from a designated elephant corridor in the Western Ghats of Tamil Nadu, while allowing the affected people to seek an alternative source of livelihood from the state government.
While hearing petitions challenging the Madras High Court’s September 2025 order, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said: “We will not allow encroachment on elephant corridors.” The corridor is crucial for the movement of elephants between the Sigur Plateau and the Mudumalai Tiger Reserve.
After dismissing the appeals filed by resort owners and other commercial establishments operating in the area, the bench, also comprising Justices Joymalia Bagchi and V Mohan, said: “We see no basis for interfering with the Supreme Court’s order. The measures suggested by the Supreme Court to protect the elephant corridor do not merit any interference.”
At the same time, the court left it open for the Tamil Nadu government to consider acquiring alternative land or take appropriate steps to meet the demands for alternative source of livelihood of those affected by the eviction.
Additional Solicitor General Haripriya Padmanabhan, representing the Tamil Nadu government, informed the court that the area has already been cleared of all commercial occupations in compliance with the Supreme Court order. However, she noted that obtaining alternative land poses challenges due to high costs and the presence of tribal communities and forest dwellers in the surrounding areas. According to the state, obtaining alternative land as envisaged by the Supreme Court would impose an additional financial burden of about $1,300 Crores.
The Supreme Court allowed the state to resort to the Supreme Court if it faced any difficulty in obtaining land.
While appearing for the petitioners, senior human rights advocates Salman Khurshid, Shoaib Alam and BB Suresh asserted that those affected include workers and people who have been running small businesses in the area for several decades. Alam asked the court to postpone the matter for two weeks until the acquisition process is completed.
Opposing this application, Padmanabhan said that granting such relief would lead to another round of litigation before the Supreme Court. After rejecting the petition, the judge told Alam: “We will not give you permission for even one day.”
However, the court noted that “such a request (for an alternative source of livelihood) could be considered sympathetically by the State. However, we make it clear that no commercial activity whatsoever will be permitted at the location in question.”
The origin of the dispute goes back to the 2011 Madras HC order upholding the Tamil Nadu government’s notification to declare an elephant corridor in the Sigur plateau. The notice directed private land owners within the notified area to vacate the land and hand over the vacant properties to the state.
The Mudumalai Hospitality Association challenged the notification in the Supreme Court, which upheld the state’s decision. The Supreme Court also constituted a three-member committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to study the objections raised by landowners and other affected persons. The committee found that the buildings were illegal, and the local authorities subsequently issued demolition orders. The association appealed these orders before the Supreme Court, which rejected its request, which led to the lawsuit being filed before the Supreme Court.
