In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed appeals seeking a modification of the criteria for identifying private ‘forests’ in the state of Goa. The three-Judge Bench emphasized the adequacy and validity of the current criteria, asserting that no alteration is required.
The court stressed the finality of the three established criteria, which include forest tree composition, contiguous forest land, and a minimum area of 5 hectares with a canopy density not less than 0.4. The Bench cautioned that altering these criteria could potentially classify plantations such as coconut, orchards, bamboo, palm, supari, and cashew, grown by farmers on private lands, as private forests.
The decision upheld the order by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), emphasizing that the issue of criteria determination was part of proceedings in the T.N. Godavarman case. Although the applications were not decided on merits, the Tribunal directed the Chief Secretary of Goa to devise a time-bound plan for the completion of forest identification and demarcation.
Tracing the history of the subject, the court noted that criteria formulated by the Forest Department of Goa in 1991, later adopted by the Sawant Committee (1997) and the Karapurkar Committee (2000), have been consistently applied. The appellant’s challenge primarily centered on the 1991 criteria regarding canopy density, arguing for consideration of areas with tree canopy density between 0.1 to 0.4 as ‘forest’ under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.
The respondents, however, asserted the finality of the 1991 criteria, highlighting the impracticality of conserving small patches of forest land with a lower canopy density. They argued that reducing the criteria would necessitate cumbersome prior clearances on every private land.
The court noted that the appellant’s challenge to the 1997 criteria was estopped, emphasizing the conclusiveness of the three criteria mentioned in the Sawant Committee’s 2nd Report, as previously validated in Tata Housing Development Corporation v. Goa Foundation.
The court rejected the appellant’s reliance on the Net Present Value concept, emphasizing the importance of expert committees in identifying forest areas. It acknowledged the diverse geographical conditions in each state, rejecting the notion of universal criteria.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court, while rejecting the appeals, vacated the interim order from 2015, allowing the issuance of ‘No Objection Certificates’ for conversion of plots with natural vegetation meeting specific criteria.
