Forest Conservation Laws in India
AIMS AND OBJECTIVE
The objective behind having Forest Conservation Laws in any country is to make regulations and policies that help in conserving the forests inclusive of flora and fauna. The need to conserve the forests arises as they play a crucial role in the economic development of the country. Not limited to just economic advantages, forests are the biggest source of natural resources and are home to several species and that’s how help in maintaining the balance of ecosystem. India is one such country that has about 70 million hectares of land covered with forests which is approximately 21.23 percent of the total geographical area of the country. However, what is ideally required to ensure ecological stability is that about one-third of the total land area of the country should be under forest or tree cover. And therefore there arises a need to have legal regulations to safeguard the forests of the nation. The paper focuses not just on the existing laws but also on the evolution of these laws from the colonial times.
THE COLONIAL PERIOD
During the colonial period forests were seen as the main source for economic development as it provided for timber and other natural resources. Another reason to clear the forests was to expand agricultural production. Further to introduce railways in the country, deforestation was a must to bring railway lines. Various other construction works were also the need of the hour and henceforth the state adopted forest laws. A forest department was formed in the year 1864 and a year later came the Indian Forest Act,1865 which asserted the State’s monopoly over the forest lands. When the Indian Forest Act,1878 came into force, it classified three types of forest; the first one being used for commercial purposes; the second one being protected forests and; lastly the last category of forests for the villagers and for their betterment. However, what actually happened was that more protected forests got converted and came under the ambit of State by being reserved forests.
INDIAN FOREST ACT,1972
The Act came into force to consolidate the laws relating to forests and its produce and the duty that can be levied on the same by the State. The act as provided earlier defines the three category of forests, being the Reserved, Protected and Village forests and how the state is empowered on all the same directly or indirectly. Even though one may think that the Reserved Forests are the only ones on which the State has the right, but what stands true is that State can to an extent use the other two as per their needs. The act further mentions what will happen in case of dispute on who shall get the rights and hence a post of A Forest Settlement Officer was made to look into such matters of settlement of rights and decide if the local communities or the state shall have the said rights. Further the act gives power to the State to notify any land which is not a government property as a forest. And a number of activities on the same can be prohibited by the State. Lastly what is clear is the act clearly demonstrates how the State can exploit the forests by bringing any regulations for economic and money interests. Instead of having ecological approach, the State had egocentric approach.
CONSERVING THE FORESTS
Widespread degradation of the forests found the need to have actual laws that will conserve the forests and safeguard them from further exploitation. The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 came into force with the objective of restricting the use of forest land for non-forest purposes and controlling the de-reservation of the forests that have been reserved under the Indian Forest Act,1927. The major change that 1980 Act brought was to give the power to Central Government taking it away from the State. An entire procedure was made and had to be compulsorily be implemented. The act gave the power to the Central to decide when there could be any activities and when they will be strictly prohibited.
The judiciary has played a major role in expanding the forest laws in the country through its various interpretations. The term ‘FOREST’ was widened in the landmark judgment, T.N. Godarvarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India where it was made clear that forest would be inclusive of any area that is recorded as a forest irrespective of the ownership. The Supreme Court radically re-oriented licensing and functioning of forest-based industries. The Court controlled and prohibited a number of activities affecting the ecology. The Court also introduced Afforestation Schemes.
In the case of Sushila Saw Mills v. State of Orissa where is was held that the protection of forests is in the interest of public and hence any bans and restrictions on trade in the light of the same shall not be challenged and shall not be considered as arbitrary.
The judiciary also played an important role by making Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority and the Central Empowered Committee which would examine the interlocutory applications, reports and affidavits filed by various bodies and then to submit their recommendations before the Court. They are also entrusted with the power to decide complaints filed by individuals regarding any steps taken by the government or compliance with the orders passed by the Apex Court.
CONCLUSION
Even though there were several measures taken by the court, the judiciary was highly criticized for various reasons such as for it getting involved in the micromanagement of the forests in the country, it making various quasi-executive structures and bodies, and the manner in which the Court addressed the issue of forest encroachments leading to violation of rights of the tribal and forest dwellers and lastly how the decisions of the courts can at times seem to be unsound, impractical and lack understanding of the complexities of the conditions and laws across such a diverse country. The need of the hour is to create and form a balance between both economical and ecological interests however non of it should ever impact the forests of the country.
Also read - Right to Know and Right to Healthy Environment
1 Comments
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete