New Delhi: A retired forest official has stated how Assam’s restrictive technical norms for a forest have been defined as to have 99% accepted Woodland-Regraded 1,153 1,168 hectares in a forest — to snatch forest security measures in Dima Haso area.
The report of the Central Strong Committee of February includes the detailed dramatic shortage, state officials, despite accepting that the region involves “ingrained state forest” with 20% to 70% tree cover in the region that “comes within the definition of the forest as per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.”
Through narrow definitions, the revelation comes amid increasing concerns about the Supreme Court’s orders. Earlier this week, Haryana re -defined the “dictionary meaning” of the forest with the criteria, which environmental activists say that most of the remaining Aravalli forests of the state could exclude forests from legal protection.
The Assam controversy belongs to a project in Dima Hasao, characterized by the rugged mountainous region and important natural forest cover in a hill district. The region is part of the Northern Catcher Hills, falling within the biodiversity-rich landscape.
The Supreme Court’s Central Strong Committee (CEC) examined an application by a cement company to refund the funds paid for the forest clearance formalities, saying the firm said that the firm said that seven new limestone mining mining blocks adjacent to their existing mine in Dima Hasao did not require forest clearance. The company paid 56.85 crore in compensatory afforestation costs, net current price, tree operating costs and other fees to clean its original site as part of environmental protection rules.
After plotting the coordinates on the decision support system of the Ministry of Environment, the company found that none of the proposed new blocks were classified as forest land recorded. The company demanded a complete return of all the allegations paid with the interest earned by unnecessarily, concluding that it had unnecessarily acquired forest withdrawals for its earlier mine.
Preventive 2022 Definition Applied
In the center of these claims, the Outside of the forest is Rule 2 (1) (E) (III) of Assam’s Trees (Sustainable Management) Rules, which states that one area only qualifies as a forest, if it is “a continuous patch of 10 hectares or not more than 200, less than 200 trees are grown.”
When the CEC visited the site in September 2024 and asked Assam to report its State Expert Committee on the forests of Assam – as required under the Supreme Court order of 1996 TN Godavarman Supreme Court – the state government failed to produce one. At the beginning of that year, the Supreme Court ordered the states to classify the forests according to the “dictionary meaning” of the word, a ruling that meant that states had to follow the wide, general knowledge interpretation of forests.
Instead, Special Chief Secretary (Forest) MK Yadav and other officials proposed using the definition of 2022.
The entire 1,168-hectare patches of the depressed forest covering six mines were then surveyed using a drone, with only 14.53 hectares of restrictive tree-sleeping criteria. The former forest officer said to nominate HT, “Therefore, the CEC has ordered its discovery/order that there is a forest except 14.53 hectares, ie 1,153 hectares are not a forest and can be used for mining, which can be used for mining without getting forest clearance.”
Special Chief Secretary Yadav confirmed HT that the rules of 2022 would now be implemented statewide to classify forests, and thus, environmental security. “A new state expert committee will identify deemed forest areas based on trees outside the forest rules and revenue records,” Yadav said, saying that the definition is applied to the statewide.
The matter highlights clear contradictions on official positions. Both the Divisional Forest Officer and Secretary of the Department of Environment and Forests told the CEC that the mining area “comes within the definition of the forest as per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India” and Haflong includes “depressed state forest” under Dima Haso Division (West).
However, despite this acknowledgment in a reaction dated 14 June, 2024, “No documents related to unhappy state forest were submitted by the Forest Department or the applicant,” said the Central Strong Committee.
The committee eventually concluded that except for 14.53 hectares, “the rest of the area, ie, is not a forest and can be used for mining, which without receiving forest clearance, according to the retired forest officer, who analyzed the case.
Forest analyst Chetan Aggarwal said that Assam’s approach reflects a disturbed pattern in the states. “Assam has proposed a threshold of 200 trees per hectare to identify deemed forests. It is a high border, especially small trees are never considered as a ‘tree’, while in case of calculating a wooden perspective while counting the tree for such purposes.
He said that the threshold “officially can not get much from the notified forests and it means mainly to exclude everyone, but the most dense forest cover with many young trees. As they mature, the stems per hectare are reduced over time.”
Aggarwal attracted similarities with other states: “Recently Haryana has come up with an extraordinary highly high minimum level of one canopy cover, which is considered as a region.
On December 12, 1996, the Godavaraman’s decision roughly defined the forests as a “dictionary meaning”, regardless of official classification or ownership, directing states to make specialist committees within a month to identify such areas.
The Forest Protection Amendment Act, 2023, especially the Supreme Court does not recognize the “unpredited deemed forests” as a protected category, aimed at reviewing and limiting the 1996 decision of 1996. Eleven retired government officials and environmental activists successfully challenged the amendment, confirming an interim order, which confirms a comprehensive dictionary definition.
Central strong committee refused cement company 56.85 crore refund request, deciding that since sufficient vegetation was already removed from the mining area, it was impossible to determine the original forest position when the lease was given years ago.
