A. JOHN KENNEDY ETC.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS ETC.

                 [2025] 3 S.C.R. 1437 : 2025 INSC 443

                        A. John Kennedy Etc.
                                  v.
                 State of Tamil Nadu and Others Etc.
                   (SLP (Civil) No(s). 999-1001 of 2025)
                                24 March 2025
               [Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta,* JJ.]


                            Issue for Consideration
       The issues related to removal of encroachments and restoration
       of forest areas in the Agasthyamalai landscape, which includes
       within its ambit the Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled
       Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife
       Sanctuaries.

                                   Headnotes†
       Forests – Western Ghats – Restoration of pristine forest areas
       and protection of tiger habitats/wildlife reserves/sanctuaries
       falling under the Agasthyamalai landscape – Directions given
       by Supreme Court – Forest Conservation Act, 1980 – Wild Life
       (Protection) Act, 1972:
       Held: Forests form the lungs of the ecosystem, and any
       depletion/destruction of forest areas has a direct impact on the
       entire environment – World facing the calamities caused by the
       climate change, and the primary culprit is the depleting forest
       cover because of rapid urbanization, unchecked industrialization,
       encroachments, etc – Supreme Court has time and again passed
       mandatory directions to remove the encroachments from the forest
       areas and to curb any attempt to reduce the forest cover in the
       country – As an interim measure, Central Empowered Committee
       (CEC) to conduct an extensive survey of the entire Agasthyamalai
       landscape, including Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled
       Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife
       Sanctuaries – CEC shall indicate in its report all instances of non-
       forestry activities going on in these areas contrary to the statutory
       provisions – CEC shall recommend measures for restoration of
       (a) the reserved forests, (b) the tiger habitats, and (c) elephant
       corridors and (d) other wildlife reserves (sanctuaries) in and
       around the Agsthyamalai landscape, including the abovementioned

* Author
1438                                                      [2025] 3 S.C.R.

                       Supreme Court Reports


    sanctuaries/reserves – For this purpose, the CEC may employ all
    scientific procedures including Remote Sensing Satellite Imagery,
    Geo Mapping etc. [Paras 2, 4, 27, 29]

                            Case Law Cited
    T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India and Ors. [2006]
    3 SCR 1024 : (2006) 1 SCC 1; State of Telangana and Others v.
    Mohd. Abdul Qasim(Dead) Per LRs [2024] 5 SCR 81 : (2024) 6
    SCC 461; In Re : T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union Of India
    and Ors. (IA No. 20650 of 2023) (2025) 2 SCC 641 – referred to.
    Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Tamil
    Nadu and Ors. (2018) 1 CTC 733 – referred to.

                              List of Acts
    Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972; Forest Conservation Act, 1980;
    Tamil Nadu Forests Act, 1882.

                           List of Keywords
    Singampatti Zamin forests lands; Wildlife Sanctuary; Tiger
    Reserve; Reserve forest; Deputy Director and Wildlife Warden;
    BBTCL (Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Limited); Lease;
    Non-forestry purposes; Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve;
    Core Critical Tiger Habitat; Environment & Forests Department;
    Ecosystem; Climate change; Depleting forest cover; Urbanization;
    Industrialization; Encroachments; Eco-system; Ecological
    balance.

                          Case Arising From
    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Civil)
    No(s). 999-1001 of 2025
    From the Judgment and Order dated 03.12.2024 of the High Court
    of Judicature at Madras in WPMD No. 13104, 13375 and 17911
    of 2024

                       Appearances for Parties
    Advs. for the Petitioners:
    Sanjay Parikh Sr. Adv., Prasanna S., Ms. Sanjana Srikumar, Ms.
    Kritika, Ms. Vanshika Mohta, Henri Tiphangne, Robert Chandra
    Kumar.
[2025] 3 S.C.R.                                                         1439

     A. John Kennedy Etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others Etc.


     Advs. for the Respondents:
     Tushar Mehta, SG, Amit Anand Tiwari, Sr. Adv./A.A.G., P.S.
     Raman, Sr. Adv./Advocate General, Ms. Purnima Krishna, M.F.
     Philip, Karamveer Singh Yadav, Togin M. Babichen, Renganath,
     Ms. Saushriya Havelia, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Sarthak Karol,
     Shantanu Sharma, Madhav Sinhal, Aditya Shankar Dixit.

                 Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court

                                   Order

     Mehta, J.

1.   These petitions raise two important issues for our consideration. The
     first being the preservation of Reserve Forests, Wildlife Sanctuaries
     and Tiger Reserves in the State of Tamil Nadu and the other being
     the claim of the petitioners, being the displaced tea estate workers,
     claiming rehabilitation pursuant to their eviction from an erstwhile tea
     estate by the name of Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Limited
     [for short ‘BBTCL’] located in Singampatti, Tamil Nadu, after the same
     was declared to be a Reserved Forest, Wildlife Sanctuary and Tiger
     Reserve under the provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
     [for short ‘Wildlife Act’]. The present petitioners had approached the
     High Court of Madras by filing various writ petitions, seeking a direction
     for providing them employment, rehabilitation, and compensation,
     etc. Another set of writ petitions (Public Interest Litigations), which
     were analogously heard, raised the important issues of restoration
     of the degraded forest areas pursuant to their liberation from the
     cultivations. All the writ petitions were disposed of/closed by the High
     Cour vide a common order dated 3rd December, 2024, giving general
     directions for the rehabilitation of the erstwhile tea estate workers,
     leaving the issue of paramount importance, i.e., conservation and
     restoration of the forest areas inconclusive.
2.   Needless to say, that the forests form the lungs of the ecosystem,
     and any depletion/destruction of forest areas has a direct impact on
     the entire environment. The world at large is facing the calamities
     caused by the climate change, and the primary culprit behind this
     is the depleting forest cover owing to a myriad of issues including
     rapid urbanization, unchecked industrialization, encroachments, etc.
1440                                                        [2025] 3 S.C.R.

                         Supreme Court Reports


3.   This Court in the continuing mandamus of T.N. Godavarman
     Thirumalpad v. Union of India and Ors. (2006) 1 SCC 1, has
     repeatedly issued mandatory directions to the States and other
     authorities to ensure that the forest cover is maintained/restored
     and any efforts to encroach thereupon are dealt with by iron hands.
4.   India has a forest cover of about 7,15,343 sq. km as per ‘India
     State of Forest Report 2023’, which is about 21.76% (approx.) of
     the total landmass of the country. Nepal has 44.74% (approx.),
     Bhutan has 72% (approx.), and Sri Lanka has 29% (approx.) forest
     cover. Hence, clearly the forest cover in India is not adequate and
     needs to be enhanced. A recent report, submitted by the Ministry of
     Environment and Forests, in proceedings before the National Green
     Tribunal indicates that almost 13000 sq. kms. area of forests is under
     encroachment. This Court has time and again taken up this issue
     and passed mandatory directions to remove the encroachments
     from the forest areas and to curb any attempt to reduce the forest
     cover in the country.
5.   In this context, we would like to quote the following excerpts from this
     Court’s judgment in the case of State of Telangana and Others v.
     Mohd. Abdul Qasim(Dead) Per LRs (2024) 6 SCC 461, authored
     by Hon. M.M. Sundaresh, J. :-
          “29. Forests not only provide for and facilitate the
          sustenance of life, but they also continue to protect and
          foster it. They continue to tackle the ever-increasing
          carbon dioxide emissions produced by humans in the
          name of development, while striving to sustain all species.
          Despite the unblemished, selfless and motherly service
          rendered by forests, man in his folly continues with their
          destruction, unmindful of the fact that he is inadvertently
          destroying himself.
          30. Consequent to the advent of agriculture, man has
          destroyed a significant portion of forests at his own peril.
          Forests serve the Earth in a myriad of ways ranging from
          regulating carbon emissions, aiding in soil conservation
          and regulating the water cycle. Water being a life source,
          its availability for all life forms is heavily dependent upon
          the aquifers created by forests. Forests also play a pivotal
          role in controlling pollution, which significantly affects the
[2025] 3 S.C.R.                                                              1441

     A. John Kennedy Etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others Etc.


           underprivileged, violating their right to equality under Article
           14 of the Constitution of India, 1950. It is the vulnerable
           sections of the society who would be most affected by
           the depletion of forests, considering the fact that the more
           affluent sections of society have better access to resources
           as compared to them. Therefore, the protection of forests
           is in the interest of mankind, even assuming that the other
           factors can be ignored..[..].
           31. There is a crying need for a change in our approach.
           Man being an enlightened species, is expected to act as a
           trustee of the Earth. It is his duty to ensure the preservation
           of the ecosystem and to continuously endeavour towards
           the protection of air, water and land. It is not his right to
           destroy the habitat of other species but his duty to protect
           them from further peril. A right to enjoy cannot be restricted
           to any specific group, and so also to human beings.
           The time has come for mankind to live sustainably and
           respect the rights of rivers, lakes, beaches, estuaries,
           ridges, trees, mountains, seas and air. It is imperative to
           do so as there is always a constant threat to forests due to
           the ever-increasing population. Man is bound by nature’s
           law. Therefore, the need of the hour is to transform from
           an anthropocentric approach to ecocentric approach which
           will encompass a wider perspective in the interest of the
           environment.”
6.   We, therefore, consider it necessary to take up the issues relating to
     the removal of encroachments and restoration of the forests which
     were left inconclusive by the High Court.
7.   Background facts relevant and essential to the controversy are noted
     hereinbelow.
8.   The entire extent of Singampatti Zamin forest lands in the State of
     Tamil Nadu, admeasuring an area of 3388.78 hectares, were leased
     out by the then Zamindar to the BBTCL for a period of over 99 years
     way back on 12th February, 1929. The lease holders cleared out the
     forests area and started cultivating crops like tea, coffee, along with
     various types of spices and rubber over the land in question and
     this exploitation of the forest areas had been going on unabatedly
     for more than 95 years.
1442                                                         [2025] 3 S.C.R.

                          Supreme Court Reports


9.   The ‘Singampatti Zamin forests lands’ was declared to be a reserved
     forest vide Government Order [for short ‘GO’] dated 23rd March,
     1978. In the year 2007, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued
     GOM No. 145 dated 28th December, 2007, whereby the entire area
     covered by the tea estate was declared to be a ‘Core Critical Tiger
     Habitat’. In the year 2012, the Government issued another GOM Nos.
     E & F dated 12th August, 2012, notifying the entire area as a Wildlife
     Sanctuary and a Tiger Reserve under the provisions of the Wildlife
     Act. The lands in question were declared to be a part of Kalakkad-
     Mundanthurai Reserve Forest on 28th February, 2018.
10. The BBTCL assailed the said declarations in Writ Petition No. 16921
    of 2014, which is still pending consideration.
11. We are informed that there are more such tea estates in the State
    of Tamil Nadu which were allotted for cultivations by the erstwhile
    Zamindars by changing the nature of forest lands to revenue
    lands.
12. Concurrently, a batch of writ petitions came to be filed in the High
    Court of Madras, some of which were in the nature of Public Interest
    Litigations relating to forest issues, while others pertained to the claims
    of the displaced tea estate workers to protect their livelihood and rights
    to rehabilitation, compensation and re-employment pursuant to their
    dislodgement from the tea estate. In the Public Interest Litigations
    [i.e., Writ Petition (MD) Nos. 16381 of 2024, 16501 of 2024, 19108
    of 2024 and 24693 of 2024], a specific prayer was made to restore
    the entire forest area lands, which had been destroyed on account
    of plantation activities. All the above writ petitions were clubbed and
    taken up together by the High Court.
13. In these proceedings, a status report was filed by the Deputy Director
    and Wildlife Warden of the Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve,
    stating therein that the Government vide GOM dated 2nd January,
    2018, has declared an area to the extent of 22979.19 hectares to
    be a reserve forest under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu Forests
    Act, 1882 [for short the ‘Act’], which includes 3388.78 hectares
    area leased to BBTCL. This declaration was made after following
    the due process of law as provided under the TN Forest Act, taking
    into consideration the various claims made under the Act. It was
    also stated in the said affidavit that as per Section 2 of the Forest
    Conservation Act, 1980, prior approval of the Government of India is
[2025] 3 S.C.R.                                                           1443

     A. John Kennedy Etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others Etc.


     required for assigning use of forest land for non-forestry purposes, by
     way of lease or otherwise to any private person, or to any authority,
     corporation, agency or other organization. The entire area leased
     out to the tea estate by the former Zamindar of Singampatti forest
     lands forms the core of the Kalakkad- Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve
     and has been declared as ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ vide GO No.
     145 dated 28th December, 2007, issued by Environment & Forests
     Department, Government of India.
14. It was further mentioned that preserving the said area is critical for
    the survival and well-being of the entire eco-system. The reserve
    forest is a very critical component and forms the catchment area of a
    perennial river in the State of Tamil Nadu, namely, “Thamirabarai”. Any
    disturbance to the eco-system would have adverse consequences to
    the water supply as well as the environment of the area in question,
    thereby affecting millions of people living in the adjoining districts of
    Tirunelveli and Thoothukudi, etc. It was emphasized in the affidavit
    that restoration of the forests, on previously leased out lands put to
    cultivation use, was of utmost importance to maintain the ecological
    balance.
15. The affidavit also mentions that most of the plantation workers, who
    were seeking reliefs in the writ petitions, were outsiders comprising
    of the migratory population and thus, they were not falling within
    the definition of ‘traditional forest dwellers.’ The affidavit reiterates
    and reaffirms that the entire area of Singampatti village, including
    the area leased-out to the BBTC, has been declared as a reserved
    forest vide GO (M.S.) No. 03 dated 12th January, 2018.
16. The Division Bench of the High Court referred to an earlier judgment
    authored by Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. M. Sundresh (as His Lordship then
    was), in the case of Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Ltd. and
    Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. (2018) 1 CTC 733, wherein
    extensive directions (quoted below), were given to the Government
    to preserve and restore the forest area:-
           “39. The area in issue is pristine forest area. It has rich
           biodiversity and it must be preserved at least for the future
           generations. It accommodates river sanctuary. There
           flow 14 rivers in the Agasthyamalai landscape. The area
           must be protected as it is. Therefore, keeping in mind
           the climate change and its effect, every human being in
           the world has to ensure the preservation of eco system
1444                                                       [2025] 3 S.C.R.

                         Supreme Court Reports


          and to continuously endeavour towards protection of air,
          water and land.”
17. It is, in this background, and considering the importance of restoration
    of the forest areas in the entire Agasthyamalai landscape, we
    requested learned Solicitor General Shri Tushar Mehta and Shri
    K. Parameshwar, Senior Advocate, who appears as Amicus Curiae
    in the forest related matters, to assist the Court in this matter.
18. On the previous date of hearing, Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor
    General, submitted that the Central Government is committed to
    conservation and restoration of forest areas and shall unreservedly
    comply with all directions which may be issued by this Court to
    secure this objective.
19. Shri K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae pointed out that the
    region in question is an important biodiversity hotspot in the Western
    Ghats, comprising a part of the Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve.
    He drew the Court’s attention to para 4 of the judgment in Bombay
    Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. (supra) which is quoted as under:-
          “4. Biosphere Reserve (BR) is a representative part of
          natural and cultural landscapes extending over large area
          of terrestrial or coastal/marine ecosystem or a combination
          thereof. Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve forms the
          core zone of Agasthiyarmalai Biosphere Reserve. In the
          4th World Congress of Biosphere Reserves, Agasthyamala
          Biosphere Reserve has been declared as World Biosphere
          Reserve taking note of its cultural and ecological diversity.
          Agasthyamala Biosphere Reserve is included in the
          World Network of Biosphere Reserve under the Man and
          Biosphere (MAB) Program of UNESCO in the 28th Session
          of International Coordinating Council held in Lima, Peru
          from 18th to 19th March, 2016.”
20. Shri Parameshwar referred to topography of the Agasthyamalai
    landscape, which includes within its ambit the Periyar Tiger Reserve,
    Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai
    and Thirunelveli Wildlife Sanctuaries. He pointed out that the
    High Court of Madras in the afore-quoted judgment of 2018, has
    recognized this entire area as crucial to elephant conservation in
    Southern India. He urged that the High Court has already issued
    a mandate to evacuate the tea estate workers from the critical
[2025] 3 S.C.R.                                                             1445

     A. John Kennedy Etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others Etc.


     forest areas which have to be maintained as pristine forests and no
     commercial activities, including ecotourism cultivation, etc. can be
     permitted on these lands. He further submitted that significant part of
     the encroachment is owing to the illegal cultivation of silk cotton being
     carried out by the unscrupulous elements in the core forest areas.
21. However, it was the contention of learned Amicus Curiae that with
    the efflux of time, these directions have lost their edge and have
    become inadequate for meaningful restoration and rehabilitation
    of the Agasthyamalai landscape. He urged that it is imperative
    that a scientific survey should be carried out for determining the
    boundaries of all the forest areas in the Agasthyamalai landscape
    and to identify the extent of encroachments prevailing thereupon. As
    per Shri Parmeshwar, only after the forest areas are identified and
    distinctly demarcated, measures required to restore and rejuvenate
    the forest areas which are extensively being depleted owing to
    systematic encroachments and exploitation by cultivated plantations,
    going on for almost one century, can be set in motion. The forest
    boundaries need to be secured, preceded by a scientific survey,
    which should include Satellite Imagery by Remote Sensing methods
    and Geo-Mapping of the entire area failing which the objective of
    establishing the tiger reserves i.e., ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ and
    having a healthy tiger population in the said reserve forests can
    never be achieved. He referred to the following observations made
    by this Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad (2025) 2 SCC 641
    and urged that a healthy tiger population is crucial to the health of
    the forests and that a ‘Core Critical Tiger Habitat’ merits the highest
    level of protection. The same is reproduced hereinbelow:
           “The tiger perishes without the forest and the forest perishes
           without its tigers. Therefore, the tiger should stand guard
           over the forest and the forest should protect all its tigers.”
           This is how the importance of the tigers in the ecosystem
           has been succinctly described in ‘Mahabharta’. The
           existence of the forest is necessary for the protection of
           tigers. In turn, if the tiger is protected, the ecosystem which
           revolves around him is also protected. The tiger represents
           the apex of the animal pyramid and the protection of their
           habitat must be a priority. “A healthy tiger population is
           an indicator of sustainable development in the 13 tiger
           range countries.”
1446                                                        [2025] 3 S.C.R.

                         Supreme Court Reports


22. Learned Amicus Curiae prayed that the Central Empowered
    Committee (‘CEC’) constituted under the directions of this Court may
    be asked to conduct an extensive survey of the entire landscape and
    to give its suggestions for restoration of the pristine forest ecosystem.
23. Shri Parmeshwar further submitted that the CEC may be assigned
    the task of surveying the entire Agasthyamalai landscape so as to
    find out the extent of encroachments, if any, existing in these areas
    including the critical tiger reserves; to give a report regarding non-
    forestry activities (including any kind of cultivation) in and around
    the reserved forest areas.
24. He urged that the concerned authorities of the State may be mandated
    to stop the Government facilities and to remove all infrastructures
    including fair price shops, schools, Anganwadi, banks, water supplies,
    roads, bridges, transport facilities, etc. being provided in these
    reserved forest areas.
25. He also submitted that this Court may be pleased to provide protection
    to the forest personnel from malicious prosecutions in which they are
    frequently being entangled during the eviction proceedings; and to
    direct the local administration and police authorities to provide support
    and protection to the forest personnel during the eviction process.
26. Shri P.S. Raman, learned Advocate General appearing for the State
    of Tamil Nadu, submitted that the State Government is committed
    to ensure that no part of the reserve forest areas is encroached
    upon and that the entire area of the Agasthyamalai landscape
    which includes reserved forests referred to supra, are freed from
    encroachments and restored to their original form. He urged that
    the State Government has already taken proactive initiatives to
    ensure removal of encroachments, restoration of the forests and
    rehabilitation of the tea estate workers. The process for restoration
    of the Singampatti Zamin area as a forest area has already been
    commenced and the task of relocating and rehabilitation of the
    workers is complete. He assured that the State Government shall
    provide all support to the CEC in the process of survey, as may be
    directed by this Court.
27. In view of the submissions noted above and as an interim measure,
    to initiate the process of restoration of the pristine forest areas
    and to protect the tiger habitats/wildlife reserves/sanctuaries falling
[2025] 3 S.C.R.                                                        1447

     A. John Kennedy Etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others Etc.


     under the Agasthyamalai landscape, we hereby direct the CEC to
     conduct an extensive survey of the entire Agasthyamalai landscape,
     which would include Periyar Tiger Reserve, Srivilliputhur Grizzled
     Squirrel Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai and Thirunelveli Wildlife
     Sanctuaries. The CEC shall indicate in its report all instances of
     non-forestry activities going on in these areas contrary to the statutory
     provisions viz, the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, the Wild Life
     (Protection) Act, 1972, etc.
28. Comparative data pertaining to the forest cover as it existed earlier
    vis-à-vis the current position shall also be provided so as to gauge
    the extent of depletion/degradation in the forest area.
29. The CEC shall also recommend measures for restoration of (a) the
    reserved forests, (b) the tiger habitats, and (c) elephant corridors
    and (d) other wildlife reserves (sanctuaries) in and around the
    Agsthyamalai landscape, including the above-mentioned sanctuaries/
    reserves. For this purpose, the CEC may employ all scientific
    procedures including Remote Sensing Satellite Imagery, Geo Mapping
    etc., so that the process of survey can be expedited.
30. The concerned officials of the State Government including the District
    Administration, the Police Administration and the forest officials of
    each district involved shall be responsible for providing all required
    assistance and support to the CEC for completing the process of
    survey.
31. Twelve weeks’ time is granted to the CEC for completing this exercise.
32. The matter shall be listed on 15th July, 2025, for receiving the report
    of the CEC and for further directions.
33. The issues relating to rehabilitation of the workers shall be considered
    on 22nd April, 2025.
34. List on 22nd April, 2025.

     Result of the case: Directions issued.



     †
         Headnotes prepared by: Bibhuti Bhushan Bose