Protected Areas - The Legal Chamber

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...

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the 2025 EIA Notification, clarifying that the "General Conditions" under the EIA 2006 Notification do not apply to building and construction projects. Consequently, such projects will continue to be appraised and granted environmental clearance by State-level authorities (SEIAA/SEAC) and not be automatically elevated to the Central level for approval. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The NGT had directed that all building and construction projects falling within 5 km of protected areas, critically polluted areas, or other eco-sensitive zones must be treated as ‘Category A’ projects. This meant they would require environmental clearance from ...

Tag: Protected Areas

Supreme Court Issues New Guidelines for Tiger Safaris and Forest Protection

Central vs. State Green Authority: Supreme Court Settles the Jurisdiction Debate for Builders