1. Alleged encroachment into forest land — Survey of India report accepted — Eviction of encroachers ordered. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
Back
Next 
2002 Supreme(SC) 2284
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N. Kirpal, CJI., Y.K. Sabharwal, Arijit Pasayat, JJ.
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad and ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and others - Respondents
IA No. 566 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995 with IA No. 276 with 413, 437, 453, 454 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995, IA No. 703 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995, Monitoring Report (First) of Central Empowered Committee in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995, IA No. 756 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995 etc
Decided On : 29-10-2002
The court established that scientific surveys by apex authorities are final for forest demarcation, necessitating summary eviction of encroachers. It also mandated a separate, non-consolidated fund for compensatory afforestation to ensure exclusive use for environmental rehabilitation and protection.
Headnote:(A) Forest Law - Summary Eviction - Boundary Demarcation - When the apex survey organization determines the boundaries of a reserved forest using scientific methods and latest equipment, such report shall be treated as final and binding. Any land identified as falling within these boundaries must be vacated, and the state is obligated to evict encroachers, using force if necessary. (Paras 15, 18)
(B) Forest Conservation - Compensatory Afforestation Funds - A separate fund for compensatory afforestation, distinct from the general revenues of the union or states or the consolidated fund, should be created. This ensures that monies from user-agencies are utilized exclusively for forest protection and rehabilitation. (Paras 30, 31, 34)
(C) Environmental Law - Mining and Industrial Regulation - All mining activities in specific protected hill ranges regarded as forest area or protected under environment laws are prohibited. Furthermore, no unlicensed sawmills or wood-based industries shall be permitted to operate, and existing unlicensed units must be closed. (Paras 43, 46)
Facts of the case:
The matter involved multiple applications regarding the encroachment of a reserved forest for commercial cultivation, the improper utilization of funds for compensatory afforestation, the installation of electricity transmission lines through a national park, the operation of unlicensed wood-based industries, and illegal mining in a hill range. A scientific survey was carried out to identify forest boundaries and encroachers.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the authenticity of the apex survey organization's report and ordered the immediate removal of encroachments. It directed the union to frame comprehensive rules for the management of a dedicated fund for compensatory afforestation. Permission for the transmission lines in the national park was granted subject to the deposit of a significant sum for afforestation. A total ban on mining in a specific hill range was imposed and unlicensed sawmills nationwide were ordered to be shut down.
Issues: Whether the findings of the apex survey organization are conclusive for eviction purposes; whether funds for compensatory afforestation should be kept separate from consolidated funds; and whether mining and unlicensed industrial activities in protected areas can be banned.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that scientific demarcation by the highest survey authority is incontrovertible. Once land is identified as part of a reserved forest, no other defense is available to the possessor, and the state must act to reclaim it. To ensure environmental restoration, compensatory funds must be ring-fenced from general government revenue to prevent misuse.
Result: Applications disposed of with directions for eviction, creation of a dedicated fund, and imposition of bans on specific mining and industrial activities.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
environmental law
- forest conservation
- wildlife protection
- administrative law
-
property law
- rights in reserved forest (Para 17)
Table of Contents
2. Claimants contended that their lands were not part of reserved forest — State accepted survey report. (Para 12 , 13 , 19 )
3. Survey of India report final and binding — Encroachers must be evicted — Compensation for environmental losses. (Para 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 )
4. Survey of India's report on forest boundaries is conclusive and cannot be challenged — Encroachers must be evicted. (Para 14 , 17 , 18 , 20 )
5. Eviction of encroachers ordered — Compensatory Afforestation Fund created — Mining banned in Aravalli Hills. (Para 21 , 34 , 42 , 46 )
6. What is the evidentiary value of a Survey of India report in determining forest boundaries?
The report is final and binding; it cannot be challenged as Survey of India is the apex survey organisation and used scientific methods. (Para 10 , 14 , 15 , 17 )
7. Can encroachers be evicted summarily from reserved forest?
Yes, under Section 64-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard, encroachers can be summarily evicted. (Para 16 , 18 , 21 )
8. What compensation is payable by encroachers for commercial use of forest land?
If encroachers voluntarily vacate within three months, no compensation; otherwise Rs. 5 lakh per hectare per month. (Para 21 )
9. Should a separate Compensatory Afforestation Fund be created?
Yes, to deposit all monies from user-agencies for compensatory afforestation, net present value, etc., to be managed by a body. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 )
10. Is mining banned in the entire Aravalli Hills?
Yes, the court prohibited all mining activity in the entire Aravalli Hills from Haryana to Rajasthan. (Para 46 )
ORDER :
B.N. Kirpal, CJI.
Report of the Central Empowered Committee regarding transfer of funds and related issues
Further report of the Central Empowered Committee regarding transfer of funds and related issues has been filed. Copy of the same is being given to Mr. A.D.N. Rao. To come up for appropriate orders on 1-11-2002.
IA No. 756
2. To be listed for hearing after three weeks before a Bench of which the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Y.K. Sabharwal and the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat are members.
IA No. 276 with IAs Nos. 413, 437, 453 and 454
3. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel commenced his arguments at 2.45 p.m. and was on his legs when the Court rose for the day leaving the matter as part-heard.
After I.A. Nos. 634-635 the cause title is the same as is on 29.10.2002, and before the said I.As. cause title was shown as follows:
I.A. No. 276 with 413, 437, 453, 454, in W.P. (C) No. 202/1995, I.A. No. 566 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995, I.A. No. 703 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995 (Monitoring Report (First) of Central Empowered committee in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995).
Coram & appearance: same as on 29-10-2002
Mr. Kapil Sibal resumed his arguments at 10.35 a.m. and concluded at 11.15 a.m. Thereafter, Mr. G.L. Sanghi and Mr. Ranjit Kumar made their submissions for 15 minutes each. Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned amicus curiae made his submissions from 11.45 a.m. to 12.05 p.m. Arguments concluded. The Court then made the following order:
IA No. 276 with IAs Nos. 413, 437, 453 and 454
4. We are here concerned with the alleged encroachment into Tatokola Forest in the State of Karnataka.
5. On 29-7-1998, T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (18) v. Union of India, (2000) 10 SC 494, this Court directed the State of Karnataka to indicate the extent of encroachment in the forest land in the State. With regard to Tatokola Reserved Forest there were allegations regarding large-scale deforestation. Shri R.M.N. Sahay, Conservator of Forests was appointed as the Commissioner of this Court and directed to go to Tatokola Reserved Forest and to give a report about the present state of affairs in that forest.
6. Subsequently, on 7-5-1999 this Court passed another order on the receipt of the report of Shri Sahay. In the said report, Mr. Sahay had stated that there were large-scale encroachments and the State of Karnataka was required to give its response to the position indicated in the said report. What is, however, important is that this Court took note of the fact that survey was being conducted in Chikmangalur area by the Survey of India, and this Court by its order dated 7-5-1999 directed the Survey of India to continue with the survey operations and to give a report regarding encroachment in the Chikmangalur area of the forest.
7. The Survey of India then submitted its report which has been placed on record here. The said report describes the manner in which the actual survey of the reserved forest was carried out and along with the report a map of the area has been filed indicating the boundaries of the forest as well as the land therein which has been encroached upon. A list of the encroachers has also been included.
8. IA No. 453 filed by Mr. B.L. Shankar was that he was the owner of a coffee estate in Survey No. 3 and that land was not part of the Reserved Forest.
9. This application along with the other applications was forwarded to the Central Empowered Committee for consideration and report.
10. After hearing the applications in IAs Nos. 413, 437, 453 and 454 on 12-7-2002 and 5-8-2002, the Empowered Committee submitted its report on 5-9-2002. The Empowered Committee accepted the survey and the report of the Survey of India and came to the conclusion that as per the said report as well as the report of Shri Sahay, 611.23 acres of forest land had been encroached upon and came to the following conclusions:
(1) The report given by the Survey of India about boundaries of Tatokola Reserved Forest and the extent of encroachment inside it should be accepted as the final report as the
