illegal construction - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Issues New Guidelines for Tiger Safaris and Forest Protection

4Feb

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Issues New Guidelines for Tiger Safaris and Forest Protection

The Supreme Court upheld and expanded upon its March 2024 directions concerning tiger conservation. It mandated that Tiger Safaris may only be established on non-forest or degraded land within buffer zones, provided they are not part of tiger corridors and are integrated with rescue centres. The Court accepted the Expert Committee's recommendations, directing the notification of Eco-Sensitive Zones for all Tiger Reserves and imposing strict regulations on activities within buffer and fringe areas to prioritize an ecocentric approach. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an application by Shri Gaurav Kumar Bansal concerning illegal constructions and felling of trees within the Corbett Tiger Reserve, particularly for establishing a Tiger Safari at Pakhrau. Following its detailed jud...

Judicial Propriety Upheld: Supreme Court Says Validity of Sanction Must Be Challenged Only Before It

The Supreme Court ruled that when a sanction order is issued pursuant to its ongoing monitoring of proceedings, its validity can only be challenged before the Supreme Court itself. No other court, including a High Court, is entitled to entertain such a challenge or grant a stay on that sanction while the matter remains pending before the apex court. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from the Supreme Court's suo moto action concerning illegal construction and rampant tree felling within the Corbett Tiger Reserve. The investigation, initially directed by the Uttarakhand High Court and later monitored by the Supreme Court, was conducted by the CBI. The CBI filed a final report, leading to the requirement of prosecution sanction against involved officers. While the State of ...

“Supreme Court Exposes Builder-Politician Nexus in Pune Pune Forest Land Scam”

The Supreme Court ruled that the allotment of 11.89 hectares of reserved forest land in Pune for non-forest purposes violated Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and the public trust doctrine. It quashed the illegal allotment to private builders, ordered restoration of the land to the Forest Department, and mandated a nationwide audit of similarly diverted forest lands. The judgment reaffirmed the state's fiduciary duty to protect forest resources and prohibited their conversion for commercial use without Central approval. Violations were held irreparable even under the doctrine of desuetude. Facts Of The Case: The case involved 11.89 hectares of reserved forest land in Pune's Kondhwa Budruk village, originally notified under the Indian Forest Act, 1878. In 1968, the land wa...