Context

• The Supreme Court is hearing a petition challenging the constitutionality of the Forest (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2023.
• It is noteworthy that for this, the Supreme Court directed the states and union territories to work as per the definition of "forest" laid down in the 1996 decision in the case of TN Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India.

Important points of the court order

• Any new proposal to open a zoo or start a 'safari' on forest land will now require court approval.
• State governments and union territories were directed to provide details of forest land falling within their jurisdiction to the Center by March 31 this year.
• The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change will make available on its website the details of 'forest area', unclassified forest land and community forest land provided by the states and union territories by April 15.
• The bench, in its interim order, asked states and union territories to act as per the definition of 'forest' laid down by the apex court in its 1996 judgement in T N Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India.

Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023

• According to the government, the primary objective of the bill is to eliminate any uncertainty related to the Supreme Court's judgement on the Godavarman case.
• It aims to provide clarity on the definition of 'forest' and exempt certain types of forest land.
• The Bill proposes to use up to 10 hectares for construction of strategic linear projects relating to national importance and national security within a distance of 100 km along the international borders or the Line of Control (LOC).
• Forest up to 0.10 hectare situated along a railway line or a public road managed by the Government; Plantation on private land which is not classified as forest requires obtaining prior forest clearance.

Points of concerns

• There are concerns among environmental activists that this would potentially exclude important forests in the Himalayan, Trans-Himalayan and North Eastern regions from receiving prior forest clearance.
• Due to this, these areas which are home to a variety of endemic species will no longer be safe for those species. Besides, this will also pose a threat to biodiversity.
• Most forest areas are already vulnerable to unsustainable infrastructure development and extreme weather events, and exempting them from forest clearance requirements will only increase their vulnerability.
• Forest rights groups argue that the exemption the government wants to provide is against the Forest Rights Act of 2006.

Important Facts for exam

T N Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India and Others Case, 1996

• In 1996, a former forest officer T.N. Godavarman filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court through which he had drawn the attention of the Hon'ble Court regarding the degradation of forest land due to various developmental activities like mining, quarrying and construction being carried out without proper environmental clearance. .
• The main debate in the case centered on the issue of whether forests in our country can be diverted for non-forest purposes and if so, under what circumstances.
• In this case the court held that forests could be diverted for non-forest purposes, but only under certain conditions and after obtaining the necessary environmental clearance.
• This case is considered important in shaping the environmental jurisprudence of India.