The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

1. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980: purpose

India lost forest cover rapidly after independence as States diverted forest land for agriculture, industry and projects. The Act, first an Ordinance of 25 October 1980, put a central check on such diversion. It is short, but it has been the main forest law for four decades because of how the Supreme Court applied it.

2. Section 2: prior approval of the Central Government

No State Government or other authority may, without the prior approval of the Central Government, make an order directing:

1. that a reserved forest shall cease to be reserved;
2. that any forest land may be used for any non-forest purpose;
3. that any forest land be assigned by lease or otherwise to a private person or a body not owned or controlled by the government; or
4. that any forest land be cleared of naturally grown trees in order to use it for reafforestation.

“Non-forest purpose” means breaking up or clearing forest land for any purpose other than reafforestation, including plantation crops such as tea, coffee, rubber and oil palm; but works for the conservation, development and management of forests and wildlife are forestry purposes. An Advisory Committee advises the Centre (section 3); contravention is an offence (section 3A), and authorities and departments are liable under section 3B.

Conditions of approval. Approvals carry compensatory afforestation on equivalent non-forest land (or double the area of degraded forest) and payment of the net present value of the forest lost, as the Supreme Court required in the Godavarman proceedings. The Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 placed these funds under national and State authorities (CAMPA). The Forest Rights Act, 2006 requires the consent of the gram sabha and settlement of forest rights before diversion, which the Court enforced in Orissa Mining Corporation v. Ministry of Environment and Forest, 2013 INSC 267.

3. The Supreme Court and the meaning of “forest”

In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, 1996 INSC 1477, the Court held that “forest” must be understood in its dictionary sense, and covers all statutorily recognised forests and any area recorded as forest in government records, whatever its ownership. The Act therefore applies to “deemed forests” and private forests. The Court stopped non-forest activity, including mining and saw mills, in such areas without central approval, and has supervised forests since through continuing mandamus and the Central Empowered Committee. In Lafarge Umiam Mining v. Union of India, 2011 INSC 461, it laid down guidelines on forest clearances and the use of the National Forest Policy, 1988.

4. The 2023 amendment

The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023:

• renamed the Act the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980 and added a preamble referring to India’s carbon sink and net-zero commitments;
• under a new section 1A, applies the Act to land declared or notified as forest under the Indian Forest Act 1927 or other law, and to land recorded in government records as forest on or after 25 October 1980, but not to land whose use was changed by an authorised order before 12 December 1996;
• exempts strips along roads and railways, and land within 100 km of the international borders, Line of Control or Line of Actual Control for strategic linear projects of national importance, with further exemptions for security infrastructure and public utilities in left-wing extremism areas; and
• adds zoos, safaris, eco-tourism and silvicultural operations to the list of forestry activities.

Criticism. The amendment narrows the Godavarman dictionary meaning: unrecorded deemed forests may fall outside the Act. The border exemption covers much of the North-East and Himalayan forests. Communities’ consent under the Forest Rights Act is not mentioned. Petitions challenging the amendment are pending; by an interim order in February 2024 the Supreme Court directed that the dictionary meaning from Godavarman continue to apply while it hears them, and asked States to record all forest land, including unclassed and community forests.

5. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986: purpose and definitions

Enacted under Article 253 after the Bhopal gas leak of December 1984, the EPA is an umbrella law: it fills gaps left by the Water and Air Acts and gives the Central Government wide powers. Its preamble recites the Stockholm decisions.

• Section 2(a): “environment” includes water, air and land and the inter-relationship among them and human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organisms and property.
• Section 2(b), (c) and (e): environmental pollutant, environmental pollution, and hazardous substance.

6. The main provisions

1. Section 3(1): the Central Government may take all measures it deems necessary for protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing, controlling and abating pollution. Section 3(2) lists examples: standards for environmental quality and emissions, restriction of areas where industries may operate, procedures for accidents and hazardous substances, inspection, laboratories and research.
2. Section 3(3): the Centre may constitute authorities; examples are the Central Ground Water Authority, the Loss of Ecology Authority set up after Vellore, and the Dahanu Taluka authority.
3. Section 5: power to issue directions, including closure, prohibition or regulation of an industry and stoppage of electricity, water or other services. This is the most used enforcement power.
4. Section 6: rules on standards, maximum pollutant limits, and hazardous substances.
5. Sections 7 to 9: no emission in excess of standards; handling of hazardous substances only under procedure; duty to report accidents.
6. Sections 10 and 11: entry, inspection and sampling.
7. Section 15: originally imprisonment up to five years and fine. The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 replaced this with monetary penalties imposed by an adjudicating officer, credited to an Environment Protection Fund; non-payment remains an offence.
8. Section 19: courts take cognisance on a complaint by the Central Government or an authorised officer, or by any person who has given sixty days’ notice of the offence and of the intention to complain: a citizen complaint provision.

7. Delegated legislation under the EPA

• The EIA Notification, 2006 (replacing that of 1994): prior environmental clearance for listed projects, with screening, scoping, public consultation and appraisal. In Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Rohit Prajapati, 2020 INSC 326, the Court held that ex post facto clearance is contrary to the precautionary principle and the scheme of the Notification. The question has been litigated further since.
• Coastal Regulation Zone notifications (1991, 2011, 2019).
• Waste rules on hazardous, bio-medical, plastic, solid and electronic waste.
• The Rules for the Manufacture, Use, Import, Export and Storage of Hazardous Micro-organisms, Genetically Engineered Organisms or Cells, 1989, which set up the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC).

8. Assessment

The EPA’s strength is its breadth. Its weaknesses are concentration of power in the Centre, reliance on notifications that can be diluted without Parliament (the draft EIA Notification 2020 drew wide criticism for this reason), weak enforcement by pollution control boards, and, after 2023, the replacement of criminal liability by penalties, which supporters see as ease of compliance and critics as a licence to pollute for a fee.

How this is examined

Likely long questions: “Discuss the salient features of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,” “Examine the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the 2023 amendments,” or “Explain the role of the Supreme Court in forest conservation.” Short notes: section 2 of the Forest Act; compensatory afforestation; section 5 directions; EIA; GEAC. Link the Acts to the constitutional principles in the previous note and, in this paper, to the GM-seed and IP issues.