Even as the Centre made environmental clearance for linear projects simpler by allowing non-forest activities like felling of trees right after in-principle approval, the National Green Tribunal has ordered that no non-forest activity be carried out in a forest area unless a final order has been passed by the State government.
It issued the direction that such orders be put in the public domain as per the Forest Conservation Act. It also decided that such orders passed will be appealable.
“No non-forest activity in the Forest Area that is covered under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, will be permitted and carried on in any manner whatsoever, unless an order has been passed by the competent authority of that State government and put in the public domain by putting it on its website and complying with the other requirements in accordance with law,” said a Bench headed by NGT chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar.
“As the law has already been stated by the Tribunal, that it is only an order passed under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, that is appealable under Section 16 of the NGT Act, we direct that appeals will lie against such orders to avoid difficulty to any litigant/ aggrieved person from approaching the Tribunal in accordance with law,” it said.
The Bench was hearing a petition filed by wildlife biologist Milind Pariwakam, who had challenged the validity of two communications dated August 8, 2014, and January 15, 2015, by the Centre. The communications relaxed forest clearance for felling of trees for linear projects like highways, allowing felling and commencement of work right after in-principle clearance.
This is in contrast to the guidelines issued under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, as per which forestry clearance will be given in two stages. In the first stage, the proposal shall be agreed to in-principle. At this stage, usually the conditions related to transfer and mutation of equivalent non-forest land for compensatory afforestation and realisation of funds are stipulated. The second stage concerns issuing of formal approval after receipt of compliance report from the State government.
The Centre has been claiming that relaxation in norms for linear projects will bring in expeditious implementation and execution of projects of public utility like roads, railways lines, transmission lines and pipelines.
Mr. Pariwakam had said that the Centre’s communications are in violation of the scheme of the Forest Conservation Act and adversely affect the right of appeal of an aggrieved person, as contemplated under the NGT Act.
While passing the order, the Tribunal noted: “The legal position undisputed before us is that permitting use of the forest area for non-forest activity can only be permitted under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, by the State Government in whose jurisdiction the forest falls. It is also undisputed before us that MoEF has intended to provide guidelines for expeditious granting of consent to the linear projects which are amongst others of national importance and necessary for the development of the country.”
