ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN
FOREST CONSERVATION
University Institute of Legal Studies
Panjab University
B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) – 8th SEMESTER
2020-21
Presented To: Presented By:
Dr. Sabina Salim Sakshi Mangla
Teacher In-Charge 191/17 – Section D
1|Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Any work requires the effort of many people and this is no different. First of all,
I want to express my heartiest thanks to my teacher Dr. Sabina Salim, for firstly
making me understand the contents of my topic and then giving me a wonderful
opportunity to present this topic in form of an assignment. Her support and
teaching helped me a lot to complete this assignment.
I would also like to thank my friends who were always available to me for help
and also helped me collect data for my project through various sources. They also
provided me with material I needed and made my work as easy as possible.
Regardless of anything, I wish to express my gratitude to those who may have
contributed to this assignment, even though anonymously.
2|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Table of Cases ................................................................................. 04
• Introduction ..................................................................................... 05
• Constitutional Mandate and Forest Conservation ........................... 07
• Legislative Provisions ..................................................................... 08
• Role of judiciary in forest conservation .......................................... 14
• Critical Analysis .............................................................................. 20
• Conclusion ....................................................................................... 21
• Bibliography .................................................................................... 22
3|Page
TABLE OF CASES
• Bansuiara Marble Mines v Union of India ........................................ 17
• Goa Foundation v Conservator of Forests ......................................... 17
• Kamal Kishore v State of Madhya Pradesh ....................................... 18
• Niyamavedi v State of Kerala ............................................................ 17
• R.L. & E. Kendra, Dehradun v. State of U.P ..................................... 14
• Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh ... 05
• State of Kerala v Sunil Kumar ........................................................... 12
• Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India ............................................... 13
• TN Godavarman Tirumulpad v Union of India ................................. 14
4|Page
INTRODUCTION
The current process of industrialization, urbanization and globalization are
adversely influencing on the natural resources like land, water, forests etc. There
is utmost need to conserve and utilize these resources in a sustainable manner
since they are the very basic components of human development. In a developing
country like India, the thrust for economic development has put more pressure
on the natural resources, particularly the forest resources.
Forests help in maintaining the ecological balance. They render the climate
equable, add to the fertility of the soil, prevent soil erosion, and promote
perennial stream flow in rain-fed rivers. They also shelter wild animals, preserve
gene pools, and protect the tribal population. The Supreme Court took note of
this role in Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v State of Uttar
Pradesh1 that besides the benefits from environmental and ecological
perspectives, forests bring revenue to the state, supply raw material to industries,
and act as a source of fuel and fodder. Forest management always gives rise to
conflicting view-points, for instance, development activities like construction of
dam or starting an industry in a forest area often raise questions regarding the
violation of the forest laws. In a society based on the rule of law, conflict of
values is to be reconciled and priorities set. This process should precede and also
form the basis of formulation of legal policies and devices for the management
of forests.
In India, the conservation of forest has been ensured through legislative acts,
judicial pronouncements and executive orders. It is a fact that there are number
of legislative steps taken to ensure forest conservation in India but the
contribution of Indian Supreme Court in this context is unparallel. Since last two
decades the Supreme Court of India has been performing the stellar role by
1
AIR 1988 SC 2187.
5|Page
taking a Herculean task of comprehensive conservation and protection of forest
across the country. It has added a new dimension to environmental scenario in a
country. With the help of some cases, it has covered almost all aspects related to
forest conservation and other related issues like conservation of biodiversity,
national parks etc. The Court has emerged as a lawmaker on forest conservation
issues.
The Supreme court has looked at the environment and forests as closely related
entities. The Supreme court initially intervened in cases of environment to
protect the Fundamental Right to Life (Article 21 of constitution of India) and
later the interventions were extended to protect forests and wildlife as well. The
intervention by Supreme Court in case of forest and wildlife conservation has
been innovative and has devised and suggested many innovative tools for
example- Writ of Continuous Mandamus, Central Empowered Committee, PIL,
Green Tribunal, CAMPA etc.
The most remarkable contribution of Supreme Court in forest conservation
is to define forest. Though the legislation Indian Forest Act for conservation of
forests had been passed by the British in year 1865, then amended in year 1878
& 1927, but the term “forest” was not defined in the acts. And the term Forest
remained undefined until the Supreme Court defined it, in TN Godavarman
Case. The term “forest” was given a broad interpretation to include, the
dictionary meaning of the word- ‘forest’ beside the recorded and notified forest
areas and also laid down various situations in which no forest can be acquired
for non- forest purposes without taking the consent of Central Government.
In India, the judiciary has shown deep concern for the forest conservation. The
judiciary has not only played a pivotal role in a manner to interpret the forest
laws to protect the forest and environment but also it has shown judicial activism
by entertaining public interest litigations under articles 32 and 226 of the
Constitution.
6|Page
CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE AND
FOREST CONSERVATION
The Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 has introduced a new
directive principle of state policy-article 48-A and a fundamental duty under
article 51(A) (g) for the protection and improvement of environment including
forests. These provisions provide as under:
Article 48-A. - Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of
forests and wild life. - The State shall endeavor to protect and improve the
environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.
Article 51-A(g) -It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and
improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life,
and to have compassion for living creatures. A perusal of the above provisions
clearly shows that both State and the citizens are under an obligation to protect
and safeguard forests, which will have an impact on the environment.
"Forest" was initially a "State" subject covered by Entry 19 in List II of the VII
Schedule. The Indian Parliament realizing the national significance of the forest
has also made changes in the VII Schedule. Entry 19 in List II of the VII Schedule
has been deleted and a new entry 17-A relating to forests has been introduced in
the Concurrent List of the VII Schedule by the Constitution (Forty-second
Amendment) Act, 1976. Thus, State as well as Centre can make the law relating
to forests. The State Government can make laws relating to forest administration
provided it is in consonance with the forests policy of center for preservation and
development of the nation's forest resources.2
2
https://acadpubl.eu/hub/2018-120-5/2/192.pdf (Last visited on 10 June, 2021)
7|Page
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
The present legislative measures in India for the conservation of forest have its
origin in the British colonial India. The first codification, which came on the
statute book in relation to administration of forest in India, was the Indian Forest
Act, 1865. Thus, the history of forest law in India is more than a century old. The
Act of 1865 was amended from time to time and ultimately it was repealed and
replaced by the Indian Forest Act, 1927 which not only consolidated but also re-
shaped the law relating to forests. The said Act of 1927 was also amended from
time to time. The Forest Act of 1927 consolidated the pre-existing laws.
❖ THE INDIAN FOREST ACT, 1927:
The Indian Forest Act, 1927 contains 86 sections and it deals with four
categories of forests namely (i) Reserve Forests in Chapter II (ii) Village
Forests in Chapter III (iii) Protected Forests in Chapter IV and (iv) Non-
Government Forests in Chapter V. Thus, the Act is wide enough to cover all
categories of forests. Besides forests specified under the Act on a function
basis as reserve forests, village forests, protected forests and non-government
forests, the Act contemplates the protection of forest land under certain
conditions. Since before 1976, forest was in Entry 19 of the List II of the VII
Schedule, the States also had the jurisdiction to enact laws in relation to the
forests and accordingly the Act has been supplemented with extensive State
legislations so as to suit the requirements of various States.
The Indian Forest Act, 1927 was clearly one step to considering the
importance of ecology and environmental balance. Most of the private forests
covered under the fourth category mentioned above were earlier parts of
estates which have now been abolished and thus such forests have also
become government property. The Act sought to consolidate the law relating
8|Page
to forests, the transit of forests produces and the duty live able on timber and
other forests produce.
The Act empowers the State Government to constitute any forest-land or
waste-land as reserved forest and to issue notification in the official gazette.
After the notification under Section 4 of the Act, no right shall be acquired in
or over the land comprised in such notification and previously recognized
individual and community rights over the forest are extinguished upon such a
notification and access to forest and forest products becomes a matter of
privilege subject to permission of forest officials acting under governing laws
and regulations. The Act includes procedures for making claims against the
Government for the loss of legal rights over the forests.
The village forests are established when State assigns to a village community
rights over any land which has been constituted a reserve forest. The State
Governments make rules for managing the village forests and prescribe
conditions under which the village community is provided with timber, other
forest products or pasture.
The State Government has also been empowered to declare any forest-land or
waste-land which is not included in the reserve forest but in which the
Government has proprietary right or rights to any part of the forest products
as protected forests. The Government must survey the rights and claims of
private persons in forest being considered for protection but may declare the
forest area a protected forest pending the completion of survey. Under Section
30 of the Act, the State Governments can close portion of the forests, for such
term not exceeding thirty years, as long as the remainder of the forests is
sufficient for individuals and communities to exercise their existing legal
rights to use forests. The State Governments may prohibit certain activities
such as grazing, cultivation, charcoal burning and stone quarrying. State
Governments have been empowered to notify certain trees and forests to be
9|Page
protected forests and penalize for cutting, converting, collecting or removing
forest produce without license being granted by the respective States.
Chapter V of the Act deals with the control over forests and land not being
the property of the Government. The provisions of this Chapter show that the
Act is intended to be a piece of legislation not only in respect of government
forest but also in respect of forests and lands not belonging to government. In
other words, the Act covers non-government forests also. The State
Government can, by notification, regulate or prohibit the breaking up or
clearing of land for cultivation, the pasturing of cattle or the firing or clearing
of the vegetation to protect against storms, winds, rolling stones, floods and
avalanches, rivers and tanks, to protect roads, bridges, railways, lines of
communication and to preserve public health, etc. The Act also authorizes the
State Government to acquire private land for public purposes under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894. The State Governments have also been vested with
powers to impose duty on timber and other forest-produce and to control
transit of timber and other forest produce and to impose penalties for offences
committed under the Act.
Chapter IX deals with penalties and procedure to be followed in case of
seizure of property. However, the Act has not fully appreciated the concept
of damage caused to the forests due to illicit cutting of trees or due to fire or
because of breaking of forest cover for agricultural purposes. For example,
section 33 of the Act enumerates certain offences and provides for
punishment of imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or
with fine which may extend to Rs. 500/- or with both. Section 26 of the Act,
of course, recognizes the concept of 'compensation' for damage done to the
forest as the convicting court may direct to be paid in addition to the sentence
of imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or fine which
may extend to Rs. 500/- or both, for the acts prohibited in the reserved forests.
10 | P a g e
But this provision too has its shortcomings because this section does not
confer any power on the appellate court to award compensation.
• Critical Analysis - The major lacuna in 1927 Act was that it did not give
common ownership rights to the tribal living on the forest land. Further,
all the disputes of the tribal community were resolved through the “Forest
Settlement officer”, who in most of the cases did not take into
consideration the rights of the tribal community.
❖ THE FOREST CONSERVAITON ACT, 1980:
In 1980, the Parliament in response to the rapid decline in the forest covers in
India and also to fulfil the constitutional obligation under Article 48-A of the
Constitution enacted a new legislation, the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
This Act has been passed with a view to check deforestation which has been
taking place in the country on a large scale and which had caused ecological
imbalance and thus led to environmental deterioration. The President of India
promulgated the Forest (Conservation) Ordinance on 25th October, 1980.
Section 5 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has repealed this Ordinance.
This Act has not taken into consideration those aspects, which were covered
by the Indian Forest Act, 1927. It simply aims at putting restriction on the de-
reservation of forests or use of forest-land for non-forest purposes. The Act is
intended to serve a laudable purpose" as is evident from the Statement of
Objects and Reasons of the Act, which reads:
1) Deforestation causes ecological imbalance and leads to environmental
deterioration. Deforestation had been taking place on a large scale in the
country and it had caused widespread concern.
2) With a view to checking further deforestation, the President promulgated
on 25th October, 1980, the Forest (Conservation) Ordinance, 1980. The
Ordinance made the prior approval of the Central Government necessary for
11 | P a g e
de-reservation of reserved forests and for use of forest-land for non-forest
purposes. The Ordinance also provided for the constitution of an Advisory
Committee to advise the Central Government with regard to such approval.
Restriction on the De-reservation of Forests or Use of Forest-land for Non-
Forest Purposes: Section 2 of the Act deals with restriction on the de-
reservation of forests or use of forestland for non-forest purposes. It provides
that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being
in force in a State, no State Government or other authority shall make, except
with prior approval of the Central Government, any order directing,
i. That any reserved forest declared under any law for the time being in
force in that State or any portion thereof, shall cease to be reserved;
ii. that any forest land or any portion thereof may be used for any non-
forest purpose;
iii. that any forest land any portion thereof may be assigned by way of
lease or otherwise to any private person or to any authority,
corporation, agency or any other organization not owned, managed or
controlled by Government;
iv. that any forest land or any portion thereof may be cleared of trees which
have grown naturally in that land or portion, for the purpose of using it
for re-afforestation.
In State of Kerala v Sunil Kumar,3 the Supreme Court has clarified that
where the State Government did not want to lease any part of forest land, the
question of seeking prior approval of the Central Government did not arise.
The question of approval arises only when the State Government makes a
request for such an approval in respect of cases falling under categories
mentioned in section 2 of the Act.
3
(2006) 9 SCC 753.
12 | P a g e
Penalty for Contravention of the Provisions of the Act: - Section 3-A of the
Act provides that whoever contravenes or abets the contravention of any of
the provisions of section 2, shall be punishable with simple imprisonment for
a period, which may extend to fifteen days.
Offences by Authorities and Government Departments.- Section 3-B of the
Act provides that where any offence under this Act has been committed by a)
any department of Government, the head of the department; or b) by any
authority, every person who, at the time the offence was committed, was
directly in charge of, and was responsible to, the authority for the conduct of
the business of the authority as well as the authority, shall be deemed to be
guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished
accordingly. However, the Head of the Department or any other person
referred to above shall not be liable to any punishment if he proves that i. the
offence was committed without his knowledge; or ii. he exercised all
diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.
Power to Make Rules. - Section 4 of the Act vests, the Central Government
with the power to make rules for carrying out the provisions of this Act. Every
rule made under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made,
before each house of the Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period
of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more
successive sessions.
13 | P a g e
ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN FOREST
CONSERVATION
The judiciary played an important role in protecting forests and wildlife, by
leaving the core areas uncovered by the law as appropriate for legislative action
than for judicial formulation. Besides, emphasizing the significance of forests,
the courts endeavored to protect the rights of persons affected by development
projects and tribal people, who form part of the forest environment. Relying on
the „public trust doctrine‟ to protect and preserve forest and natural resources
they tried to enforce the concept of sustainable development to solve the
environment-development dilemma and upheld the controls and exploitation of
forest resources.4 The role of the Supreme Court of India needs special reference
in developing the jurisprudence for forest conservation in India. The independent
judiciary embedded with the power of judicial review has performed a stellar
role in the conservation of Forest and wildlife in India. The expansion of the
locus standi has given momentum to judicial activism in the development of
environmental jurisprudence in India.
❖ NATIONAL NEEDS, FOREST CONSERVATION AND JUDICIAL
ATTITUDE:
In R.L. & E. Kendra, Dehradun v. State of U.P.,5 (popularly known as
Doon Valley Case) was the first case of its kind in the country involving
issues relating to environment and ecological balance, which brought into
sharp focus the conflict between development and conservation and the Court
emphasized the need for reconciling the two in the larger interest of the
country. This case arose from haphazard and dangerous limestone quarrying
practices in the Mussoorie Hill Range of Himalayas. The mines in the Doon
Valley area denuded the Mussoorie Hills of trees and forest cover and
4
Leela Krishnan P. p.30
5
AIR 1985 SC 652.
14 | P a g e
accelerated soil erosion. The Supreme Court was cautious in its approach
when it pointed that it is for the Government and the Nation and not for the
court, to decide whether the deposits should be exploited at the cost of
ecology and environment or the industrial requirements should be otherwise
satisfied. But the concern of the Court for protecting the forest and
maintaining the ecological balance in the Doon Valley was evident when it
observed –
‘We are not oblivious of the fact that natural resources have got to be tapped
for the purposes of the social development but one cannot forget at the same
time that tapping of resources have to be done with requisite attention and
care so that ecology and environment may not be affected in any serious way,
there may not be depletion of water resources and long-term planning must
be undertaken to keep up the national wealth. It has always to be remembered
that these are permanent assets of mankind and are not intended to be
exhausted in one generation.’
In Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India,6 the State Government of
Rajasthan, though professing to protect the environment by means of the
notifications and declarations, was itself permitting the degradation of the
environment by authorizing mining operations in the area declared as "reserve
forest". In order to protect the environment and wildlife within the protected
area, the Supreme Court issued directions that no mining operation of
whatever nature shall be carried on within the protected area.
In Rural Litigation & Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh,7 the
Supreme Court held that the Act does not permit mining in the forest area.
The Act applies to renewals as well and even if there was a provision for
renewal in lease agreement or exercise of lessee's option, the requirements of
the Act had to be satisfied before such renewal could be granted. Whether
6
1992 Supp (2) SCC 448.
7
AIR 1987 SC 1037
15 | P a g e
there is a case of first instance or renewal following exercise of option by
lessee, the compliance of section 2 of the Act is necessary as a condition
precedent.
❖ THE GODAVARMAN CASES: THE HIGH-WATER MARK IN
FOREST PROTECTION -
The idea of sustainable development, i.e., the balance between environment
and development, had its influence on the judiciary in interpreting the
provisions of laws relating to the forest. Various dimensions of forest
protection were examined by courts. TN Godavarman Tirumulpad v Union
of India,8 is a remarkable illustration of the concept of sustainable
development, the pronouncements of the apex court can be summarized as
follows:
i. Forest includes the area noted in the government records as forest,
irrespective of ownership.
ii. ii. Mining license in such an area without prior approval is violative of
the FCA. All ongoing activities under such invalid license must cease.
iii. Running sawmills of any kind is a non-forest activity. All sawmills
within a distance of 100 kilometers from the border of the state of
Arunachal Pradesh are to be wound up.
iv. Responsibility is imposed on each state government to report on the
number of sawmills, actual capacity of the mills, proximity to the
nearest forest and their sources of timber.
v. Complete ban on felling of trees in the tropical wet ever-green forests
in Arunachal Pradesh is essential 'because of their significance to
maintain ecological balance needed to preserve biodiversity'. Felling of
forests in other states except in accordance with working plans is
suspended.
8
AIR 1997 SC 1228.
16 | P a g e
vi. Movement of the cut trees and timber is banned with the exception of
certified timber required for defense purposes.
vii. Each state government should constitute expert committees to identify
forest areas, denuded forests and areas covered by plantation trees and
to assess the sustainable capacity of the forest qua saw mills.
viii. In the state of Jammu and Kashmir, no private agencies should deal in
felled trees or in timber. No permission should be given for sawmills
within a distance of eight-kilometers from the boundary of demarcated
forest area.
❖ THE INFLUENCE OF GODAVARMAN CASES-
The above-mentioned Godavarman dicta had a lasting impact on the
development of environmental norms in forest protection. In Niyamavedi v
State of Kerala,9 the Kerala High Court held that the object of a biological
park not being a non-forest purpose, prior approval of the Central
Government was not necessary. In Goa Foundation v Conservator of
Forests,10 Panaji, the Bombay High Court held that Godavarman cases do not
put an embargo on the high courts' jurisdiction to pursue individual violations
of forest conservation law.
In Bansuiara Marble Mines v Union of India,11 the Rajasthan High Court
pointed out that prevention of orders of different courts and tribunals at
variance with one another was the unequivocal message of the apex court in
the Godavarman case by banning all ongoing activities. Notably, the Orissa
High Court disallowed establishment of saw mills within 10 kms from the
boundary of a forest area in view of an earlier Godavarman case that no fresh
license could be granted within the distance and without prior approval of the
CEC. The Godavarman definition of forest as the 'land recorded as forest in
9
AIR 1993 Ker 262
10
AIR 1999 Raj 154.
11
AIR 1999 Born 177.
17 | P a g e
the government records irrespective of its ownership' had its sway in Kamal
Kishore v State of Madhya Pradesh,12 in which the Madhya Pradesh High
Court held that the acts taken under an old law in the princely state are acts
done or proclaimed by the erstwhile ruler declaring reserved forest, protected
forest or village forest and are deemed to have continued as such under the
Indian Forest Act.
❖ PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION –
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is allowed under “Doctrine of Public
trust” and the condition of “Locus standi” is done away. Most of the PIL
related to environment are allowed to protect fundamental right to life Article
21 (Right to healthy environment). And any public-spirited person can
approach the higher courts for remedial measures. The Supreme Court has
even observed that a simple post card addressed to it can be considered as
PIL. The higher courts have effectively used this tool to draw attention of
public and demanded actions from executive Few critics have pointed out that
in view of large number of pending cases in various courts, entertaining
frivolous petitions may waste precious time of courts.
Through the tool of PIL (Public Interest Litigation) the Supreme Court had
dealt with variety of issues related to conservation of forest, preservation and
protection of wildlife, protecting the rights of tribal people and thus balancing
the symbiotic relationship between the forest dwellers and the goal of forest
conservation. The court has also addressed the issues of balancing the right to
freedom of trade and business and the conservation of forest and wildlife13
and issues related to biodiversity. With the help of PIL the Supreme Court has
interpreted the provisions of the FCA, 1980.
12
AIR 2006 MP 167.
18 | P a g e
❖ WRIT OF MANDAMUS –
The writ of Mandamus is issued under this Article 32 & 226 of Constitution
to enforce the fundamental rights enlisted in Chapter-II of the Constitution.
In this regard the Supreme Court has devised new tool of Writ of Continuing
Mandamus which is being issued from time to time to executive in TN
Godavarman Case (WP(c) 202 of 1995), for last 18 years from year 1996.
Many critics have raised concerns that judiciary has taken over the work of
executive. And the administration of forests is effectively being done by
Hon’ble Court. Also, the court have allowed raising connected matters and
effectively dealing with and issuing orders in respect of almost all the issues
of forest administration in one Writ Petition. Though the critics have raised
concerns but this mechanism of Writ of Continuing Mandamus has brought
some sense and streamlined many administrative actions of executive. Also,
this has given strength to executive to strictly implement the law.
19 | P a g e
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
The Supreme Court failed to account for the states’ interests and the
competing interests at local levels. By not having the representation of state
and local bodies and by not addressing and incorporating state-level needs
and inefficiencies in its orders, the Supreme Court created policies that have
been extremely difficult, if not impossible, to implement successfully.
The Supreme Court’s lack of consideration has resulted in an increase of
corruption in forest management within state governments. This corruption
has undermined the Supreme Court’s efforts to improve the nation’s forest
cover.
The Supreme Court issued policy decisions independently of the Ministry of
Environment and Forests (MoEF), making it awkward for the MoEF to
develop and enforce its own policies. The MoEF reacted to the Supreme
Court’s attention to the problem of encroachments as if it were in competition
with the Supreme Court to do something about the problem. Rather than
assisting the MoEF and providing guidance to it, the Supreme Court assumed
its responsibilities without consulting it. The MoEF has deferred to the
Supreme Court rather than developing its own forest policies. As a result, its
actions are often premature and not guided by an organized and well-planned
agenda.
The Supreme Court instigated the MoEF’s premature and insufficiently
planned actions and then created a government entity to compensate for it,
even further complicating the management of India’s forests. By attempting
to deal with the problem on its own, and by creating new organizations to
effectively replace the MoEF’s functions, the Supreme Court has complicated
the system of managing India’s forests while failing to effectively address
local people’s relationships to the forests.
20 | P a g e
CONCLUSION
India’s most unique protection for the environment and forests is the Indian
Constitution. It contains environmental policy guidance for parliament, as
well as a guarantee of life that the Indian Supreme Court interprets as
providing a right to a protected environment. Unlike other common law
jurisdictions, India’s most basic legal instrument is used to directly addresses
the question of forest protection.
The judiciary has contributed in protection and conservation of the forest by
propounding the doctrine of public trust doctrine and sustainable
development. There are various laws enacted for the purpose of the protection
and conservation of the forests, however the various judicial pronouncements
have given life to all such laws. By giving case laws such as Godavarman, the
judiciary has played the role of activist in the protection and conservation of
the forest. The court has breached the gap between the lacunas in the
implementation of the laws and various laws itself. Further, from the analysis
of various case laws cited above, it can be stated that the judiciary has tried
to balance the economic development and protection of environment. The
judiciary has also enacted various laws by giving pronouncements in relation
to the question of the protection of the forest. This makes it clear that the
judges do make law. All case laws cited above clearly indicate that the Apex
Court of India has played unique role in protection and conservation of forest
in India.
21 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
• https://acadpubl.eu/hub/2018-120-5/2/192.pdf
• Jaswal, P. K, Jaswal Nishtha, Environmental Law, 3rd Edition, 2013,
Faridabad: Allahabad Law Agency.
• Leelakrishnan, P., Environmental Law in India, 2nd Edition, 2010,
Nagpur: Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa.
• Tiwari, H. N., Environmental Law, 4th Edition, 2010 Faridabad:
Allahabad Law Agency.
22 | P a g e
