advocatemmmohan

Forest Law — Encroachment on Reserved Forest — Constitutional Obligation of State

(Paras 2, 9, 10)

The State is under a constitutional mandate under Articles 48A and 51A(g) to protect forests and prevent environmental degradation.

Encroachment upon reserved forest land constitutes a serious ecological threat.

However, environmental protection must be pursued through lawful and procedurally fair means.

Environmental Governance — Rule of Law — Due Process in Evictions

(Paras 10, 12, 13)

The constitutional duty to remove encroachments does not authorise arbitrary action.

Eviction from reserved forest must conform to:

Notice,
Opportunity to produce evidence,
Scrutiny by a competent committee,
Passing of a speaking order,
Reasonable notice period prior to eviction.

Environmental protection and rule of law must co-exist.

Reserved Forest — Long-standing Occupation — Identity Documents — No Automatic Legal Right

(Paras 3, 4)

Issuance of Aadhaar cards, ration cards, or identity documents does not confer legal title over reserved forest land.

Procedural Safeguards Approved by Supreme Court

(Paras 12–13)

The mechanism evolved by the State of Assam for removal of encroachments was approved as containing adequate safeguards, including:

Constitution of committee (forest + revenue officials).
Notice to alleged encroachers.
Opportunity to produce documentary evidence.
Determination whether land lies within reserved forest or revenue land.
Speaking order if encroachment established.
15 days’ notice before eviction.
Protection for forest villagers under Jamabandi Register and rights under Forest Rights Act, 2006.

Status Quo Protection — Interim Safeguard

(Para 13)

Status quo directed till:

Speaking order is passed, and
15-day notice period expires.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Location of Dispute

Villages located in:

Doyang Reserved Forest
South Nambar Reserved Forest
Jamuna Madunga Reserve Forest
Barpani Reserved Forest
Lutumai Reserved Forest
Golaghat Forest (Assam)

Forests notified as Reserved Forests in 1887–1888.

Appellants’ Case

Residence claimed for 70+ years.
Possession allegedly acknowledged by issuance of identity documents.
Eviction notices arbitrary.
No prior hearing.
Seven-day eviction period unreasonable.

State’s Case

Approximately 3,62,082 hectares under encroachment.
Nearly 19.92% forest area affected.
Large-scale illegal clearing for residential/agricultural purposes.
Constitutional duty to remove encroachments.

CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK EMPHASIZED

Article 48A

State shall protect and improve environment and safeguard forests and wildlife.

Article 51A(g)

Fundamental duty of citizens to protect and improve natural environment.

The Court emphasized that Directive Principles guide governance even if not enforceable.

COURT’S CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCING

The Court articulated a critical doctrinal position:

The Constitution does not envisage a choice between environmental protection and the rule of law; both must co-exist and reinforce each other.

Thus:

Environmental restoration is mandatory.
Eviction must follow fair procedure.

STATE’S ADDITIONAL AFFIDAVIT — KEY FEATURES

The State proposed a structured eviction mechanism:

Step 1: Notice

Alleged unauthorised occupant receives notice.

Step 2: Hearing

Committee (forest + revenue officials) evaluates evidence.

Step 3: Classification

If land outside forest → matter referred to Revenue Department.
If within reserved forest → further action.

Step 4: Speaking Order

Reasoned order determining unauthorized occupation.

Step 5: 15-Day Eviction Notice

Only after expiry of notice period eviction can proceed.

Protection Recognised:

Forest villagers recorded in Jamabandi Register.
Title holders under Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.

COURT’S FINDINGS

1. Safeguards Adequate

The evolved mechanism conforms to:

Fairness
Reasonableness
Due process

2. Status Quo Ordered

Till speaking order + expiry of 15-day period.

3. No Opinion on Merits

Claims to be adjudicated by Committee.

4. Article 32 Petitions

Not examined in detail due to mechanism evolved; petitioners free to pursue remedies.

RATIO DECIDENDI

The State’s constitutional duty to protect forests mandates removal of encroachments.
Such removal must comply with principles of natural justice and procedural fairness.
Identity documentation does not confer proprietary rights over reserved forest land.
Eviction from forest land requires notice, hearing, reasoned order, and reasonable time to vacate.
Environmental protection and rule of law are complementary constitutional imperatives.

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN

Tuesday, February 17, 2026

Reserved Forest — Long-standing Occupation — Identity Documents — No Automatic Legal Right (Paras 3, 4) Issuance of Aadhaar cards, ration cards, or identity documents does not confer legal title over reserved forest land.