Forest Land Cannot Be Used For Non-Forestry Purposes Including Agriculture Without Central Government's Prior Approval: Supreme Court
The Apex Court held that forest land cannot be permitted to be used for non-forestry purposes, including agriculture, and that any grant or continuation of lease for cultivation on forest land is impermissible under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta, Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has reiterated that forest land cannot be diverted or used for non-forestry purposes, including agricultural cultivation, without prior approval of the Central Government as mandated under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
The Court observed that granting or continuing agricultural activity on forest land necessarily involves clearing of forest cover, which is directly prohibited under the statutory framework governing forest conservation.
The Apex Court was hearing an appeal filed by the State of Karnataka challenging a judgment of the Karnataka High Court, which had permitted a cooperative society to make a representation for the continuation of a lease over forest land for agricultural purposes.
A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, while stating that “forest lands could not be allowed to be used for non-forestry purposes which would include agriculture”, further observed that “…granting permission to cultivate the forest land would essentially require clearing of forest and such a course of action is in the teeth of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 which precludes de-reservation or use of forest land for non-forestry purposes without prior approval of the Central Government”.
Avishkar Singhvi, AAG, represented the appellants, while Advocate Ashwani Bhardwaj, AOR, represented the respondents.
Background
The State Government had granted a lease of approximately 134 acres of land classified as forest land to the respondent cooperative society for agricultural purposes for a period of ten years beginning in 1976.
During the lease period, the members of the cooperative society cleared trees and cultivated the land. Upon expiry of the lease, the State refused to extend it and terminated the lease, leading to a series of legal proceedings initiated by the society.
After multiple rounds of litigation, including writ petitions, civil suits, and appeals, the Forest Department initiated eviction proceedings under the Karnataka Forest Act and the Karnataka Forest Manual and took possession of the land.
Despite the Forest Department having taken possession, the High Court granted liberty to the respondent society to submit a representation to the Central Government for continuation of the lease, which led to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.
Court’s Observation
The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme governing forest land and noted that the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, imposes a complete restriction on the use of forest land for non-forestry purposes without prior approval of the Central Government.
The Court relied on earlier binding directions issued in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, wherein it was held that any non-forest activity within forest land requires prior approval of the Central Government and that such activities must cease forthwith in the absence of such approval.
The Bench observed that the grant of lease for agricultural purposes itself was uncalled for, as it resulted in devastation and deforestation of a large forest area. The Court held that the respondent society, having already enjoyed cultivation of forest land for more than ten years, was not entitled to any further extension of the lease.
“No permission could have been granted to perpetuate the illegality committed while granting the lease of the forest land to the respondent-Cooperative Society”, the Bench remarked.
It was specifically held that, as per the extant statutory provisions, forest land could not be allowed to be used for non-forestry purposes, and agriculture squarely falls within the definition of non-forest purpose under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
The Court further observed that granting permission to cultivate forest land would necessarily involve the clearing of trees, which would amount to de-reservation or diversion of forest land, an act prohibited by law without prior Central Government approval.
The Bench also relied upon earlier orders passed by the Supreme Court prohibiting de-reservation of forests and noted that any attempt to continue agricultural activity on forest land would be contrary to those mandatory directions.
In view of these findings, the Court held that the High Court erred in permitting the respondent society to make a representation for continuation of the lease, as such a course would amount to perpetuating an illegality.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court. It held that no permission could be granted for the continuation of an agricultural lease over forest land.
The Court directed the Forest Department of the State of Karnataka to restore the forest on the land in question by planting indigenous trees and plants in consultation with experts, and ordered that compliance be ensured within a period of twelve months.
The matter was directed to be listed after one year for receiving a compliance report.
Cause Title: State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Gandhi Jeevan Collective Farming Cooperative Society Limited (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1461)
Appearances
Appellants: Avishkar Singhvi, Additional Advocate General; Patil Rekha Chandra Gouda, AOR; Jadhav Vishal, Advocate; Himanshu Mishra, Advocate; Shubham Shukla, Advocate
Respondent: Ashwani Bhardwaj, AOR