Commercial Crop Cultivation Cannot Be Recognized As Forest Right To Justify Presence In Forest Area : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that the cultivation of a commercial crop cannot be recognised as a forest right to justify occupation or continued presence within a forest area, while appointing a committee headed by former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai to examine claims under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) in the Megamalai region of Tamil Nadu.

“The cultivation of a commercial crop cannot, therefore, be recognised as a forest right so as to justify occupation or continued presence within the forest area,” the Court observed.

A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta was dealing with issues concerning encroachments in the Megamalai forest region, which forms part of the Srivilliputhur-Megamalai Tiger Reserve and the Agasthyamalai landscape.

The Court appointed a Special Committee headed by former CJI Gavai, assisted by an officer of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Tamil Nadu, to supervise and scrutinise the claims filed under the FRA. The Committee is to submit its report to the Court in a sealed cover.

The Court ejected the Tamil Nadu Government's contention that silk cotton cultivation in the Megamalai forest area could be justified as a traditional minor forest produce under the Forest Rights Act.

The State had submitted that silk cotton cultivation had historically been encouraged by government authorities and that the areas concerned were not Reserved Forests in their present notified form when the cultivation began.

The bench, however, observed that the material placed before it did not establish that silk cotton, as a cultivated commercial crop, had been recognised as minor forest produce under the Forest Rights Act or any other forest law.

It noted that Section 3(1)(c) of the Act recognises the right to collect, use and dispose of minor forest produce traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries.

“The concept of planned cultivation of commercial crop is totally contrary to the very concept of a naturally occurring minor forest produce,” the Court observed.

The bench further stated that permitting commercial crops to be cultivated in forest areas would alter the very nature of the forest.

“The cultivation of a commercial crop cannot, therefore, be recognised as a forest right so as to justify occupation or continued presence within the forest area,” it held.

The Court also observed that the State's claim that silk cotton cultivation was not financed or directed by large commercial enterprises required deeper examination.

The Court clarified that the cultivation of silk cotton, which is being undertaken as a commercial crop, cannot by itself establish a forest right. It noted that there was no material or official notification to establish silk cotton as a minor forest produce under the FRA.

The Court distinguished between the traditional gathering of forest produce and planned commercial cultivation, observing that permitting commercial crops within forest areas would alter the character of the forest.

As per the figures furnished by the State Government, 4,594 persons were occupying 5,072.64 hectares of forest land, with silk cotton cultivation spread over 3,637.83 hectares.

The occupants were classified into three categories: those permanently residing and cultivating within the forest area, those temporarily residing and cultivating there, and those residing outside the forest boundary but cultivating within it.

The Court excluded persons falling under the latter two categories from consideration under the FRA, solely on the basis of their cultivation activities.

It reiterated that the FRA requires forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers to satisfy the statutory conditions, including primary residence and dependence on forest land for their livelihood. In the case of other traditional forest dwellers, the statutory requirement of occupation for at least three generations, or 75 years, prior to December 13, 2005, must also be fulfilled.

The Court expressed concern over the State's delay in completing the statutory process under the FRA. It directed that the remaining Gram Sabhas be constituted within 30 days and that the claims process be completed within five months from their constitution.

The State informed the Court that around 40 Gram Sabhas had been constituted and approximately 1,600 claims had been received.

The Special Committee is required to complete its scrutiny within two months beyond the outer limit prescribed for adjudication of the claims. The State was also directed to submit monthly progress reports.

The Court further asked the CEC to examine whether silk cotton could be classified as minor forest produce under the FRA.

The matter will be taken up next on February 1, 2027.

2,767 Persons Residing Outside Forest Boundary Cultivating Silk Cotton

The Court referred to the State Government's affidavit, which classified persons occupying or cultivating land in the Megamalai Forest Range into three categories.

According to the affidavit, 4,594 persons were occupying a total of 5,072.64 hectares of forest land, of which 3,637.83 hectares were under silk cotton cultivation.

The categories were:

- Category I: 1,595 persons permanently residing in the forest area and cultivating land.

- Category II: 232 persons cultivating land with temporary residence in the forest area.

- Category III: 2,767 persons residing outside the forest boundary and cultivating land within it.

The Court held that persons falling under Categories II and III could not qualify as FDST or OTFD merely on the basis of their cultivation of forest land.

“Persons who cultivate while having only temporary residence in the forest area (Category II), as well as persons residing outside the forest boundary (Category III), cannot, on the basis of such cultivation alone, qualify as FDST or OTFD,” the bench observed.

It accordingly directed that persons falling under these two categories shall be excluded from consideration under the Forest Rights Act.

The Court also directed the CEC to examine whether silk cotton could be treated as minor forest produce and submit its opinion.

The matter has been listed for February 1, 2027, for receiving an interim status report.