LEGAL REGULATION OF

FORESTS IN INDIA

Dr. Balraj K SIDHU

Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
Prioritizing Forests
Forests are more than trees, and form part of an ecosystem that
underpins life, economies and societies.
Multiple functions of forests
Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 (FAO) – done every
five year - The world has lost a net area of 178 million ha of forest since
1990, which is an area about the size of Libya.
Sustainable Development Goals – SDG 15
India’s State of Forest Report 2021
Forest- Colonial Footprint-I
Colonial interests in Forests: In the initial years of the British rule
more and more forest land was encouraged to be brought under
agriculture with the sole objective to increase the revenue of the
exchequer.
It was the growing deficiency of oak in England that compelled the
King's Navy to meet its need by substituting teak for oak.
Government assertion that the royalty right on teak trees enjoyed by the
Indian princely states earlier would henceforth be vested in the
Company.
The material interests of the state, especially the wood requirements for
ship-building, railways, government departments and industries, were
the main driving force for the forest policies of the colonial state.
Forest- Colonial Footprint-II
1865 – IFA –empowered the government to declare forests as government
land (reserved forests).
1878 – IFA – classification of forests - reserved, protected and village
forests.
1927 – IFA – retains the classification : reserved forest [chapter II – secs.
3 – 27] - most commercially valuable and amenable to sustained exploitation.
Protected Forest [chapter IV – secs 29-34] - State-controlled, but some
concessions were granted subject to the reservation of commercial tree species
when they became valuable
Village Forest [chapter III – section 28] - those forests that yielded inferior
timber, fuel wood, or fodder, apparently to meet the needs of the people
residing in villages.
This step could have been meant to keep the villagers away from
commercially valuable reserved and protected forests
Forest Governance- Post-Independence - I
The process of expanding state control over forest continued even after
Independence.
National Forest Policy 1952 - The need for a new forest policy was
felt not only due to the changing political and economic aspirations of
the country but also to better incorporate the role of forests in national
development.
National interest which came to be identified with defence,
communications and key industries were given priority over local needs.
Natural resource base as a means to jump-start economic development
– forest remained "timber mine" instead of managing the
forest biodiversity.
Set the goal for first time that at least one-third landmass of the country
must be under forests.
Forest- Post-Independence - II
Forests shifted to Concurrent List from State List vide 42nd
Amendment Act 1976 (diminution of state power).
The chasm between the State and the people was further opened up
when the State started using force to repress dissent from the forest-
based tribal communities, such as the Gua killings (8 September
1980) where the police fired on demonstrators.
Communities became more fiercely assertive in the defence of their jal,
jangal and jamin (water, jungle and land).
Forest (Conservation) Act 1980: to check the indiscriminate
diversion of forest land for non-forestry purposes.
1988 Amendment: the state governments were prohibited from
assigning, by way of lease or otherwise, any forest land or any portion
thereof to any private person or authority (that was not owned, managed
or controlled by government) without prior sanction of the central
government.
Forest- Post-Independence - III
National Forest Policy 1988: prime emphasis on conservation of
forests and meeting the local needs of the people as well as their
participation in the protection and management of forests.
Protection of rural subsistence needs as part of traditional rights and
concessions in respect of NTFPs, grass and fodder.
Forest-based industries forced to look for alternative sources of raw
material.
Joint Forest Management (JFM): impetus to bring local forest-
dwelling and forest-fringe communities on board by giving them
responsibility for protecting and managing forests as well as sharing the
costs and benefits.
YouTube Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCTNNum1fzs&ab_channel=RSah
u
(Original)Forest Case: Key Points
T N Godavarman v. UoI (1996):
Meaning for ‘Forest’: dictionary meaning of forest and the
FCA applied to all forests regardless of their legal status or ownership.
 It also redefined what constituted "non-forest purposes" to include not
just mining but also operation of sawmill.
Court ordered all such non- forestry activities anywhere in the country
that had not received explicit approval from the central government to
cease immediately.
It also suspended tree felling everywhere, except in accordance with
working plans approved by the central government.
It completely banned, with minor exceptions, tree felling in three whole
states and parts of four other states in the forest-rich north-east.
FRA 2006: A Step Towards Atonement?
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 [ Forest Rights Act (FRA),
2006]
Redress the historical injustice done to the forest dwelling people whose
rights had not been legally recognized and recorded and who were denied
their traditional rights to forest lands and resources in legislations prior to
FRA (Preamble).
FRA is a means to address some of the pressing issues affecting livelihood and
conservation. By securing tenurial and access rights and providing an
empowered authority for conservation it aims to:
 Ensure livelihood and food security of the forest dependent communities.
Provide for basic developmental facilities for the forest villages.
Provide legal recognition to the community conservation initiatives thereby
strengthening traditional conservation practices that protect some of the
critical ecosystems of the country.
Compensatory Afforestation
Prior to CAMPA 2016: genesis can be trace to FCA 1980 (sec.2) – prior approval of
government – Rules under the Act made CA a mandatory condition for the issue of such
clearances. The condition laid down was that the user agency would have to ‘compensate’ for
the loss of forest by either raising or maintaining a plantation over an equivalent area or
depositing money with the forest department to do so.
T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad various orders led to existing conceptualization.
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that the deposited money should be constituted as a
separate ‘fund’ and in 2006 introduced the concept of forest valuation in terms of
money. It stipulated that the user agency would have to pay the net present value (NPV)
of the loss of biodiversity content and environmental services in forests from this diversion
to the concerned forest department.
The concept of NPV and the mechanism of its computation took shape from 2006 onwards
from the orders of the Supreme Court. This would take into account biological and spatial
variations in bio-geographical zones, and numerical value would be calculated according to
site/region-specific ‘scientific, biometric and social parameters’.
 The SC appointed an expert committee for such a valuation -the Kanchan Chopra
Committee quantified NPV as 438,000–1,043,000 per ha and also recommended that the
largest portion of this fund should be given to Panchayats, and the remaining portion shared
between the centre and states
CAMPA 2016
The CAFA, 2016, was prima facie enacted to utilise monies deposited with the forest
department for carrying out CA in lieu of forest diverted.
Preamble: On what activities Fund money can be utilized – para one
Created new institutions – NCAFMPA (Sec. 8) and SCAFMPA (sec.10) (replacing
ad-hoc Authority)
Definitions: Section 2
Compensatory Afforestation (d)
Penal Compensatory Afforestation (k)
NPV (j)
User Agency (p)
Creation of National Fund (sec. 3)
Scheme for allocation of Fund amount (sec.5)