'Elephants Can't Be Displaced': Karnataka High Court Quashes Land Acquisition For Housing Project In Bannerghatta National Park
The Karnataka High Court has quashed acquisition of land near Bannerghatta National Park for a housing project, observing that the area forms part of a corridor used by elephants who cannot be displaced from their homes or treated as occupants without any rights.
It further underscored that while land acquisition should be for the greater purpose of public good, however no public purpose can supersede the object of environmental conservation.
A division bench of Justice DK Singh and Justice H Shanthi Bhushan in its order said:
"It is true that the object of land acquisition should be for the greater purpose of public good. The lands may be acquired for various projects which are covered under the scope of 'public purpose.' However, in our view, no public purpose can supersede the object of environmental and ecological conservation. As important as it is to encourage development and urbanisation, the same must be done while balancing the interests of the environment and its species. The proposed Suryanagar Project aims to give affordable and well-planned housing plots to the allottees and the general public being the residents, but the same is done at the cost of displacing the wildlife and depriving them of their natural habitat. It is a settled and enduring sentiment that “there is no place like home.”
Yet, the actions of the Respondents, as borne out from the record, compel this Court to confront a disquieting question: whether the same fundamental principle of a secure and undisturbed home is to be denied to wildlife. The elephants in question, for whom these corridors constitute not merely a passage but an essential part of their natural habitat and existence, cannot be treated as occupants without rights whose homes may be displaced at will".
The bench said that housing is not the only requirement for human existence; ecology, wildlife, forest, water streams etc., are also equally important for human existence.
"We are, therefore, of the view that since the project in question itself falls within the Bannerghatta National Park Eco-Sensitive Zone of 268.96 Sq.Kms., the whole project is misconceived and would have irreversible ecological, environmental and wildlife related consequences. Therefore, the entire land acquisition proceedings are nothing but an exercise without undertaking the relevant considerations such as, scientific study of environment impact assessment, socio-ecological factors etc., as flagged by the CEC (Central Empowered Committee)," the court added.
The bench was hearing a batch of appeals filed by land owners challenging single judge's 2025 order allowing acquisition proceedings in respect of agricultural lands upon an affidavit filed by the Karnataka Housing Board that the acquisition proceedings will be carried out after obtaining relevant clearances from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The single judge had however quashed the acquisition proceedings in respect of lands converted for non-agricultural purposes.
The bench found that when the Central Empowered Committee had in its report flagged serious concern for undertaking the housing project of such a magnitude and the report is yet to be accepted or rejected by the Supreme Court, undertaking the housing project is against the relevant provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the statutory guidelines issued by the MoEFCC and also against public interest, as the effectiveness of the Ecological Sensitive Zone and its role in conservation and mitigation of human-wildlife conflict has not been taken into consideration before undertaking such a project.
It observed that the CEC had recommended that the reduction of the Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) around Bannerghatta National Park from 268.96 Sq.Kms. to 168.84 Sq.Kms. in the Final Notification dated 11.03.2020 would have disastrous consequences resulting in exclusion of ecologically important patches, creation of contiguous unprotected land pockets and weakening of identified wildlife corridors, thereby undermining the fundamental objectives of the ESZ framework as set out in the 'Guidelines for Declaration of Eco-Sensitive Zones' dated 09.02.2011.
"This project would seriously affect the Karadikkal-Madeshwara Corridor, and the Forest Department of Karnataka has already flagged the likelihood of increased human-wildlife conflict arising from this development. Ignoring all such concerns, the housing project has been undertaken. Elephant corridors constitute critical ecological linkages and are indispensable to the long-term conservation of both elephants and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Such corridors provide the necessary right of passage between fragmented habitats, facilitate seasonal and long-range movement, enable genetic exchange and reduce the ecological and demographic consequences of habitat isolation. Their protection is particularly significant where development pressures have rendered protected areas increasingly isolated and incapable, by themselves, of sustaining viable elephant populations.
The conservation of these corridors therefore requires their identification, legal protection and integration into land-use and development planning, including where necessary, protection beyond the boundaries of existing Protected Areas. The protection of elephant corridors is thus not merely a species-specific conservation measure. It serves the broader objective of maintaining landscape connectivity, ecological resilience and the integrity of interconnected forest ecosystems. In this sense, safeguarding the movement of elephants contributes to safeguarding the ecological processes that sustain the landscape itself, and consequently has significance extending to the larger public interest in environmental conservation," the court said.
The court allowed the appeals and quashed the land acquisition proceedings.
Case title: SRI R.GOVINDA REDDY v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA and batch
WRIT APPEAL NO. 418 OF 2025 and batch