Supreme Court Directs Jharkhand Govt To Notify Saranda As Wildlife Sanctuary, Says Rights Of Forest Dwellers & Tribals Won't Be Affected

The Supreme Court today directed the State of Jharkhand to declare the Saranda/Sasangdaburu forests as a wildlife sanctuary and conservation reserve. The Court also assured that issuing such a declaration would not impinge on the forest rights of the tribals or forest dwellers in the region. 

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran considered the issue of repeated non-compliance by the State of Jharkhand with its previous assurances given to issue the notification. 

The Court, in its order, frowned upon the changing stance of the State Government over the proposed area to be notified as a conservation reserve. The State of Jharkhand had sought the permission of the Court to remove 126 'compartments' where mining was taking place from the total proposed area of 31,000 sqm.

"We find that the State has been changing its stand time and again. Earlier, it had clearly admitted that in 126 compartments which were notified as the Saranda Game Sanctuary vide 1968 Notification, neither any kind of mining excavation operations nor any diversion of Forest Land for mining purposes have been undertaken except in part of the area approximately measuring 4.31 hectares. Subsequently, the stand had been changed wherein the State submitted that it is considering declaration of area measuring 57,519.41 hectare as against the original area measuring 31,468.25 hectare as a wildlife sanctuary. This stand was, yet again, changed and finally the State now proposes to notify only an area of 24,941.64 hectare as wildlife sanctuary." 

The Court held that apart from 6 compartments excluded under the Management Plan for Sustainable Mining (MPSM), the Jharkhand Government is required to declare the entire area comprising 126 compartments as a wildlife sanctuary within a period of three months from November 13. 

"We see no reason as to why the entire area of 126 compartments notified under 1968 notification should not be declared as wildlife sanctuary. However, taking into consideration the MPSM which excluded compartment numbers KP-2, KP-10, KP-11, KP-12, KP-13 and KP-14 as either Mining Zone-I or Mining Zone-II, we are inclined to permit the State to exclude the aforesaid six compartments from the area to be notified as wildlife sanctuary." 

It further directed : 

" We direct that the State Government shall notify the area comprising of 126 compartments as notified in 1968 notification, excluding six compartments i.e., compartment numbers KP-2, KP-10, KP-11, KP-12, KP-13 and KP-14, as a wildlife sanctuary within a period of three months from the date of this judgment." 

Rights Of Forest Dwellers & Tribals Not To Be Affect : Bench Clarifies 

The Court also held that the State Government's argument that the declaration of the notification would adversely affect the lives of the tribals and forest dwellers held no substance. 

The bench referred to Section 24(2)(c) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (WPA) which allows the Collector, in consultation with the Chief Wildlife Warden, to permit the continuation of existing rights of any person over land within a sanctuary. It also placed reliance upon Sections 3 and 4(1) of the ST and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 (FRA). 

S.3 FRA details a list of rights of individuals or a community protected as forest rights of forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers on all forest lands. 

While S.4(1) of FRA states : 

" Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, and subject to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government hereby recognises and vests forest rights in—

(a) the forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes in States or areas in States where they are declared as Scheduled Tribes in respect of all forest rights mentioned in Section 3;

(b) the other traditional forest dwellers in respect of all forest rights mentioned in Section 3.”

The bench held that, considering the above provisions, the rights of the forest dwellers and tribals are adequately protected even after the region is declared a conservation reserve/ wildlife sanctuary. 

The bench added that the State's claim on adverse affects on the rights of the dwellers and tribals and loss of public infrastructure upon the notification, was merely a 'figment of imagination'. It observed : 

" The bogey that on declaration of wildlife sanctuary, the habitations and rights of the tribals and traditional forest dwellers will be lost and vital public infrastructures like educational institutions, roads, etc., will have to be demolished is only a figment of imagination of the State. Rather than taking such a stand before this court, we are of the considered view that the State should have educated the tribals/forest dwellers residing in the said areas about the rights available to them under the FRA as well as the WPA." 

The Court further relied upon the decision in Orissa Mining Corporation Limited v. Ministry of Environment and Forests and others  which observed that the FRA was intended to "protect custom, usage, forms, practices and ceremonies which are appropriate to the traditional practices of forest dwellers." 

The bench also directed the State Government to " give wide publicity to the fact that by this judgment, neither the individual rights nor the community rights of the tribals and the forest dwellers in the said area would be adversely affected. The State shall also give wide publicity to the fact that in view of the provision of Section 3 read with sub-Section (1) of Section 4 of the FRA all the rights of the tribals and the forest dwellers both individually as well as of community shall stand protected."

The bench also clarified that any ancillary activities sought to be undertaken by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) in the region would be allowed to continue.

Arguments Raised By The Parties 

Sr Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the state of Jharkhand, informed the bench that a draft notification was prepared for declaring the region as a wildlife sanctuary. However, he flagged that within the region, approximately 6 acres were occupied by villagers. He urged the Court to allow the notification to exempt the area occupied by the villagers.

Sr Adv K Parameshwar, appearing as the amicus in the matter, stressed that 5-6 compartments of mining are falling within the forest area, and once declared a reserved forest zone, no mining activities can be allowed within it. He also added that the only motive of the state was to protect the interests of miners in the region.

Another counsel appearing for one of the intervenors highlighted that due to mining activities around the forests, the Koena River near the forest and its tributaries get filled with toxic orange water coming from the mining compartments.

Sibal stated that the amicus was relying on mining notifications issued in 1968, while, factually, circumstances had changed in 2025. He stressed that only SAIL (Steel Authority of India Limited) was located within a 1 km radius of the proposed reserved forest, which had to be considered.

He further clarified that as of the date, no mining activities were happening in the region of 24,000 sqms of the proposed reserved forest, and neither does the State Government have an issue with the CEC independently inspecting the region

SG Tushar Mehta appeared for the Steel Authority of India Ltd (SAIL) and submitted that while certain mines are allotted to SAIL, they have not been made operational yet. He urged the Court to exempt those mines which are non-operational in the region.

The court also heard the brief submissions made by counsel for scheduled tribes dwelling in the forest.

Previously, the Court observed that if compliance with previous orders on the issue is not done before the next date of hearing, the Chief Secretary of the State will have to show cause why no contempt should be initiated against him.

Also Read : Supreme Court Prohibits Mining Within National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries & Within 1 Kilometer Around Them