Forest Land Diverted for a Project: How to Challenge It

Forest land can be used for a mine, road, dam, transmission line or other project only with the prior approval of the Central Government under section 2 of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, formerly the Forest (Conservation) Act. That approval can be challenged. The main route is an appeal to the National Green Tribunal under section 16 of the NGT Act within 30 days of the order being communicated, extendable by up to 60 days for sufficient cause. Work done without approval, or in breach of its conditions, can be taken to the NGT under section 14. Forest dwellers' rights add a separate route through the gram sabha and the High Court.

This guide is for villagers, forest dwellers, gram panchayats and local groups who have learned that a forest they depend on has been approved for a project, and for project proponents who want to understand where approvals are attacked. It walks through how diversion is approved, where the weak points usually are, which forum to use and when, and what to file. If the problem is trees already being felled, start with our page on illegal tree cutting and urgent remedies.

If you are not sure whether the land is forest at all, read our guide on what deemed forest means first, because the answer decides which law and which forum apply.

The essentials

Can a forest land diversion approval be challenged?

Yes. An order granting approval under section 2 of the forest conservation law is one of the orders that can be appealed to the NGT under section 16 of the NGT Act. Any person aggrieved can appeal, which in practice includes villagers who use the forest, forest dwellers, local residents and organisations working on the issue. The appeal must be filed within 30 days of the order being communicated, and the NGT may allow up to 60 more days if there was sufficient cause for the delay. After that, the door closes.

Challenging an approval is not the same as opposing a project in general. The tribunal will not stop a road or a mine because people would prefer it elsewhere. It will look at whether the approval was granted on correct facts, after the required steps, with proper conditions, and with real application of mind to the forest being lost. Appeals that succeed almost always point to something specific that went wrong in the file.

There is also a second route. If work is going on without approval, or in breach of the approval's conditions, that is a violation of a Schedule I Act, and an original application under section 14 lies within six months of the cause of action.

How forest diversion is approved

The project proponent, called the user agency, applies online through the ministry's system, and the proposal goes to the state forest department. The Divisional Forest Officer inspects the site and prepares a report covering the area, the number and kind of trees, the density of the forest, wildlife presence, whether the land is part of a corridor or catchment, the land offered for compensatory afforestation, and whether the project could avoid forest land. The proposal moves up through the Conservator and the state's nodal officer to the state government, which forwards it with its recommendation. Our page on MoEFCC applications and approvals covers the applicant's side.

The Central Government decides in two stages. Smaller proposals are dealt with at the regional level and larger ones by the ministry on the advice of the Forest Advisory Committee. The first stage, often called Stage-I or in-principle approval, sets conditions: transfer of land for compensatory afforestation, payment of the net present value of the forest and the afforestation cost into the compensatory afforestation fund under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act 2016, and other site-specific conditions. Once those are met, Stage-II or final approval follows, and the state government then issues the order permitting diversion.

Forest clearance has no public hearing of its own. The public's main chances to be heard are the gram sabha process under the Forest Rights Act and, where the project also needs environmental clearance, the EIA public hearing.

Stages of a diversion and what you can do at each

Grounds that usually carry weight

Facts suppressed or misstated. The site inspection report says the area is degraded with scattered trees, when it is a dense forest; it says no wildlife, when villagers and camera traps show leopards or elephants; it understates the number of trees. Proving that the decision rested on wrong facts is the most common winning ground.

Forest rights not settled. Where people have claims under the Forest Rights Act 2006, the rules on settling those rights and obtaining gram sabha consent have to be followed before the diversion is finalised. The stage at which this must happen has changed under recent rules, with more of the responsibility placed on the state before its final order, so check the current requirement. Missing or manufactured gram sabha resolutions are a frequent problem.

Compensatory land unsuitable. The land offered for afforestation may be rocky, already wooded, already forest, under dispute, or far away in another district. Planting on land that is already forest does not compensate for anything.

Splitting the project. A larger project broken into smaller pieces so that each falls below a threshold, or a road approved in segments to avoid looking at the whole forest, is a recognised abuse.

Alternatives and wildlife ignored. The file does not show that alternatives to forest land were genuinely examined, or the project cuts through a corridor or lies near a protected area without wildlife clearance being considered.

NGT appeal, NGT application or High Court?

Use the section 16 appeal when you are attacking the approval itself. Use a section 14 application when the approval may be fine on paper but the project is violating it, felling more trees than permitted, working outside the approved area, ignoring conditions, or when there is no approval at all. The two can sometimes be combined, but the time limits are different and must each be met.

The High Court is the forum for forest rights claims as such, because the Forest Rights Act is not among the Acts in Schedule I of the NGT Act. If the real grievance is that people's recognised rights are being overridden, or that claims were never decided, a writ petition may be the right route, sometimes alongside an NGT appeal on the forest grounds. Pure Indian Forest Act or wildlife offences also go to the criminal courts, not the NGT.

Where the project also has an environmental clearance, that clearance can be appealed separately under section 16. Our guide on challenging an environmental clearance covers that side. Projects such as highways often have both, and both files should be read together.

When does the 30-day period start?

The NGT Act counts the 30 days from the date the order is communicated. For the user agency, that is the date it received the order. For villagers and others who were not parties, it is usually argued to run from when the order was put in the public domain, for example on the ministry's website, or from when the person could reasonably have known of it. The NGT has looked at this issue in different cases, and the safest course is to assume the clock started on the earliest date the order was publicly available.

Do not wait for the felling to start before acting. By then the approval may be months old. Track the proposal from the beginning, download the approval the day it appears, and file within 30 days if you intend to challenge it. If you are late, file an application for condonation with a specific, honest explanation of the delay, but remember that the NGT cannot go beyond the extra 60 days.

Whether an in-principle Stage-I approval can itself be appealed has been argued both ways. Most appeals are filed against the final approval and the state's diversion order. If work begins on the basis of Stage-I, or under a so-called working permission, take advice immediately, because that may be a violation open to a section 14 application.

How to challenge a forest diversion approval, step by step

Start this the day you hear of the proposal, not the day the bulldozers arrive.

Documents to collect for a diversion challenge

What villagers and forest dwellers can do

People who live in and around the forest are both the most affected and the best witnesses. Under the Forest Rights Act 2006, eligible forest dwellers can claim individual and community rights, and claims are decided through the gram sabha and committees at the sub-division and district level. Where claims are pending or recognised over land proposed for diversion, insist that this is recorded in the diversion file and raised at the gram sabha, and keep copies of the claims and any acknowledgement.

Gram sabha meetings on diversion should be held properly, with notice, quorum and minutes. If a meeting was never held, was held without notice, or recorded a resolution nobody passed, write immediately to the District Collector and the state's tribal welfare department with the facts, and keep proof. These irregularities are often the core of a later appeal or writ petition. Organisations supporting villages in this work can find more on our community and NGO environmental cases page.

When Advocate B.K. Singh reviews a diversion file for a village, he reads the gram sabha papers alongside the site inspection report, because inconsistencies between the two, such as a meeting recorded on a date when the inspection team says it was elsewhere, are often what opens up the rest of the case.

When the approval stands but the conditions are ignored

Many disputes arise after the approval is final and nobody appealed in time. The approval will carry conditions: the area that can be used, trees that can be felled, fencing and demarcation, the compensatory afforestation and its maintenance, protection of water bodies, muck disposal for roads and hydro projects, and wildlife mitigation. Breaches are common and can be pursued under section 14 within six months of the breach, as well as by complaint to the state forest department and the ministry's regional office.

Two breaches come up repeatedly. The first is felling more trees or a wider strip than approved, which can be shown by comparing the approved tree count and maps with a survey of stumps. The second is compensatory afforestation that exists only on paper. Our guide on enforcing compensatory plantation deals with that problem in detail.

For user agencies, the lesson runs the other way. A project that keeps its demarcation pillars, felling records, muck disposal sites and afforestation reports in order can answer a complaint with documents in the first hearing, which often ends the matter there.

Mistakes that sink diversion challenges

• Missing the 30 days. Groups protest for weeks before filing, and the appeal is then barred beyond the extra 60 days.
• Arguing the project is bad in general. The tribunal looks for specific errors in the approval, not policy objections.
• Not reading the file. Appeals filed without the site inspection report and state recommendation miss the strongest grounds.
• Relying on recent photos only. Clearing may already have begun; older images and statements show what was there.
• Wrong forum for rights claims. Forest rights arguments that need the High Court are put only before the NGT, or the other way round.
• Forgetting the other clearances. An EC or wildlife clearance for the same project may be the weaker link and goes unchallenged.

Before you file a challenge

Where to go next

For road projects in particular, read our guide on whether tree cutting for a road project can be stopped, and for occupation of forest land by individuals or companies, see forest land encroachment. Our page on forest clearance explains the approval process in more depth, and our guide to interim relief from the NGT covers urgent stays.