Supreme Court Approves Assam Govt Mechanism To Evict Encroachers From Forest Lands

The Supreme Court, on February 10, modified the order of the Gauhati High Court in terms of the latest affidavit filed by the State of Assam on the mechanism adopted in carrying out large-scale encroachment drives in Doyang, South Nambar, Jamuna Madunga, Barpani, Lutumai and Gola Ghat reserved forests in Assam.

As per the affidavit, after eviction notices are issued, it goes before a Joint Committee of forest and revenue officials. The committee is authorised to give a hearing to the occupants in order to adduce evidence. The action for removal is taken only once it is established that there has been an encroachment. A period of 15 days' notice is given through speaking orders to vacate the unauthorised occupation.

A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe has directed that the status quo be maintained till speaking orders are passed and till expiry of 15 days.

"In our opinion, the course of action to be adopted by the State Government while removing the encroachment from the reserved forest contains sufficient procedural safeguards. The process sought to be adopted by the State Government for removal of encroachment conforms to the principles of fairness, reasonableness and due process".

The Court also underscored the importance of the forest for an ecologically diverse and climatically vulnerable country like ours and how encroachment poses a threat.

"Forests constitute one of the most vital natural resources of the nation. They are not merely repositories of timber or land capable of alternate use, but complex ecological systems indispensable for maintaining environmental balance. Forests regulate climate, preserve biodiversity, rechargegroundwater, prevent soil erosion, and act as natural carbon sinks mitigating the adverse effects of climate change. In a country as ecologically diverse and climatically vulnerable as India, the role of forests assumes even greater significance. Encroachment upon forest land has emerged as one of the gravest challenges confronting environmental governance in the country."

The Court passed the order in a batch of six connected Special Leave Petitions. The SLPs were filed by the occupants who challenged the order of the division bench of the High Court, which affirmed the eviction orders initiated by the State authorities.

To briefly state, around 59 persons approached the Gauhati High Court against the notices dated July 24, 2025, issued by the State authorities, asking them to vacate their land within 7 days in the reserved forest.

The occupants alleged that the actions of the respondents contravened the provisions of Section 18(2) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886; and the Assam Land Policy, 2019, and the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in its November 13, 2024 judgment. It was also argued that notices were served upon them without any specific demarcation as to whether the land in question is revenue or forest land.

The Single Judge found that the 7-day window for claims was too short and extended it for some time. Against which appeals were filed, contending that no procedure has been followed for their eviction from their houses, which were allotted to them under some Government scheme in the past. 

During the hearing before the division bench, the Advocate General submitted that approximately 29 lakh bighas of land in the reserved forests is "infested" with encroachers and the drive understand bythe State is for removing such encroachers. More than 1 lakh bigha of land has already been cleared from encroachment.

While the occupants flagged that over a period of time, the Chief Minister of Assam have consistently portrayed residents of certain settlements as "encroachers" and "illegal occupants" even before individual rights have been adjudicated.  It was alleged that such a public declaration, emanating from the highest executive office, has created a reasonable apprehension in the minds of the petitioners that the eviction process is a policy-level hostility rather than case-specific legal scrutiny.

On August 5, 2025, the division bench allowed the occupants to bring any record/document to establish their claims that the land was allocated to them in the reserved forest for the construction of houses. It also ordered the status quo on the eviction drive.

On August 18, the State of Assam filed an affidavit, sworn by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Head of the Forest Force, Assam, as per which, occupants in question were indulging in commercial farming of betel-nut trees and had also set up fisheries. On this, the High Court expressed shock and said that it really calls for the restoration of the State mechanism to prevent such infiltration in the reserved forest.

The affidavit further stated that some commercial shops were also found existing inside the forest area, which were dismantled during the anti-enroachment drive. Whereas, the occupants filed an affidavit to demonstrate that they were legal settlers, and they were even provided facilities like water and electricity under the Rural Employment Guarantee Programmes. Few also brought on record the allotment letters. 

Perusing the allotment letters, the division bench found that the allotment of houses falls under Merapani Gaon Panchayat and not inside the reserved forest. Since no progress has been delineated to carry out such drives, the division bench said that henceforth, 15 days should be given as a reasonable period if some settlers are found, even though unauthorised. 

However, the order of the single judge bench was upheld. The division bench also directed the State Government to frame necessary regulations to prevent unauthorised encroachment of reserved forests. When the SLPs were preferred, a bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Atul S Chandurkar issued notice and ordered status quo.

Headnote

Constitution of India – Articles 48A, 51A(g), 226, and 32 – Environmental Law – Protection of Reserved Forests – Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants – Due Process – Rule of Law – The Supreme Court addressed the State's obligation to protect reserved forests while balancing the rights of long-standing human habitations - Noted that while forests are vital ecological systems and carbon sinks, and the State has a constitutional mandate to safeguard them, such protection must be pursued through lawful, non-arbitrary means.

Eviction Procedure – Procedural Safeguards – Supreme Court recorded and approved a policy mechanism evolved by the State of Assam to ensure fairness in removing encroachments: i. Committee Constitution: A committee comprising forest and revenue officials will be formed to oversee the process; ii. Notice and Hearing: Alleged unauthorized occupants must be served a notice and granted an opportunity to produce evidence of their right to occupy the land; iii. Revenue vs. Forest Land: If land is found within revenue limits and outside notified forest areas, the matter must be referred to the Revenue Department; iv. Speaking Order: If an occupation is found to be unauthorized after scrutiny, a speaking order must be passed and served; v. Grace Period: A 15-day notice period must be granted to vacate the premises after the speaking order is served.

Forest Rights – Recognition of Legal Occupation – Supreme Court noted that certain residents, such as those in "Forest Villages" listed in the 'Jamabandi Register' or title holders under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, are legally authorized and not liable for eviction - directed the parties to maintain status quo regarding the land in occupation until a speaking order is passed and the subsequent 15-day notice period expires. [Paras 9-13]

Case Details: ABDUL KHALEK Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM|SLP(C) No. 23647-23648/2025 and connected matters

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 134

Click Here To Read Order

Appearances: Senior Advocates Chander Uday Singh, Huzefa Ahmadi, Rauf Rahim, Indira Jaising, assisted by Advocates Adeel Ahmed, AoR, Abdur Razzaque Bhuyan, Giasuddin Ahmed argued for Petitioners

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for State of Assam with Advocates Shuvodeep Roy & Diksha Goswami