ORDER :

1. These appeals arise from the order of the National Green Tribunal (‘Tribunal’ hereinafter) ¹[In OA 108/2018, order dated 27.10.2020.] in an Original Application filed by respondent no. 8, Bombay Environment Action Group, for direction to the respondents to demolish certain illegal structures constructed in forest-like areas in the Mahabaleshwar and Panchgani regions in Maharashtra on the ground that these constructions have been raised without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

2. The appellants are owners and in possession of agricultural lands in these areas which form part of the area covered under the impugned order. They were not made parties before the Tribunal. They are aggrieved by the exparte directions of the Tribunal to remove ‘encroachments’ on the ground that the constructions are in violation of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. They are in appeal before us.

3. A brief history of the case is as follows. An Original Application against certain development activities in Vansadrushya in the Mahabaleshwar-Panchgani region in Maharashtra was filed in 2016. On 08.09.2016, the Tribunal passed an interim order restraining non-forest activities like felling of trees, construction work or any new development. Following the definition of forest as declared in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, (1997) 2 SCC 267 the Tribunal by its order dated 13.03.2019 directed the constitution of a Joint Committee with the Chief Conservator of Forest, Kolhapur and the Divisional Commissioner, Pune to compile information about the extent of area that falls under the expression ‘forest’. ³[As defined in Godavarman (ibid).] The Court also permitted the parties to present their material before this Committee.

4. In a subsequent order dated 03.12.2019, the Tribunal also noted the Ecologically Sensitive Zones in the entire Panchgani and Mahabaleshwar areas. In view of the sensitivity of this area, only action to be undertaken was to identify the structures and encroachments with reference to the maps and enforce the law. The respondents were directed to hold meetings with the district officials to identify areas where environmental laws were violated and chalk out an action plan.

5. However, as these directions had not been complied with, the Tribunal directed the Mahabaleshwar Hill Station Municipal Council, the Panchgani Hill Station Municipal Council, the District Collector, Satara and the Chief Conservator of Forest, Kolhapur to file a report of compliance. Pursuant to this order, the Chief Conservator of Forests, Kolhapur filed an affidavit dated 26.10.2020, which is reproduced in the impugned order.

6. The substance of the affidavit is that the Joint Committee constituted by the Tribunal did not find sufficient time to invite objections and suggestions from individual stakeholders before submitting its report. It was also stated that there is an overlap between government notified gaothans (village sites) and forest-like areas and hence there is a need to revisit the survey carried out by the Land Record Department. The affidavit proposed a schedule for further action that provides the public an opportunity to file objections and suggestions and an opportunity of hearing.

7. The Tribunal felt that the forest-like areas have already been identified and as there are encroachments over these areas, no further procedure remains to be followed except for verification, which could be completed in 3 months. As the relevant data is available, the Tribunal rejected the proposed time schedule and directed the Collector, Satara and the Forest Department to remove encroachments that are in violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and file an action taken report. The relevant portions of the order are reproduced:

“6. From the above, it is clear that there are forest alike areas identified as such and there are encroachments in violation of law. Order of this Tribunal dated 13.3