Haryana CM meets environment minister on impact of Aravalli ruling
The court has directed the state government to stop all non-forest activity and raze all illegal structures in such land within three months and report compliance.
Alarmed over the prospect of stalled development in designated forests in the Aravalli and Shivalik mountain ranges, particularly in the Gurugram and Faridabad districts adjoining Delhi, Haryana chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar rushed to the capital on Saturday to meet with Union environment minister Bhupender Yadav to discuss the possibility of an easing of rules.
Both Khattar and Yadav tweeted about the meeting held in Haryana Bhawan on Saturday. Khattar said he was committed to “the interests of the people of Haryana” and Yadav said he discussed “issues concerning the state’s sustainable development”.
The Supreme Court on July 21 held that all land covered by the special orders issued under Section 4 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act in Haryana will be treated as forests and be entitled to protection under India’s forest conservation law of 1980. This could stop the rampant and indiscriminate development in the state that threatens several patches of forests, including some in the vulnerable Aravalli range, and may even require some demolitions.
The court’s order will affect the rights of people who own the land protected under these sections, the Haryana government is understood to have said in Saturday’s meeting, according to officials who declined to be named. However, the directive leaves no room to manoeuvre, they said.
“It’s a three-judge bench which has pronounced this order. There is little scope for relief,” an environment ministry official said. “They can be used to grow trees or for other nature-based activities. We will see what else can be permitted, but definitely not non-forest activities.”
Around 30,000 hectares across the Aravalli and Shivalik mountain ranges in Haryana will be considered forest land, as per the apex court’s ruling. The court has directed the state government to stop all non-forest activity and raze all illegal structures in such land within three months and report compliance.
“All the concerned authorities shall take action to remove the remaining illegal structures standing on land covered by the special orders and used for non-forest activities on the said lands erected after October 25, 1980 (when the Forest Act came into force), without prior approval of the central government, and further to restore status quo ante including to undertake reforestation/afforestation programmes in right earnest,” the judgment said.
Although the Haryana government maintained that almost 40% area of the state and lakhs of citizens will be affected if areas under the provisions of the Punjab Land Preservation Act were to be considered as forests, an argument the top court refused to accept, experts said less than 1% of the area of the state will be protected under its orders.
A mere 0.72% of the state comprising 31,000 odd hectares has been confirmed as forest by the court, including 12,000 hectares comprising 61% of the Aravallis in Gurgaon and Faridabad, according to Chetan Agarwal, a Gurugram-based environmental researcher.
“For the remaining 39% of the Aravallis in Gurgaon and Faridabad, which includes the Mangar Bani sacred grove, and which are not notified or recorded as forest, the provision of being treated as forests as per dictionary meaning has also been reaffirmed following the 1996 Godavarman judgement,” Agarwal said on Saturday. “We hope that 25 years later Haryana will now identify Mangar Bani and the remaining 39% of the Aravallis in Gurgaon and Faridabad as forest.”
The top court’s judgment protects the forests of Haryana in general and Aravallis in particular, Ritwick Dutta, an environmental lawyer who represented the Aravalli Bachao citizens movement in the Supreme Court, had said on Thursday. “The Court’s order injects a fresh lease of life to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, which has been diluted by the government,” Dutta said.
The judgment will have implications across the country since the court stated clearly that the term forest cannot be limited to areas notified as forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, but will extend to other areas that qualify as forest, irrespective of whether they are notified in government records or not, he added.
“One can hope that the forest department of Haryana now takes proactive steps to conserve and protect these areas which need to be protected both for its biodiversity value and its environmental services it renders,” Dutta said.