The Supreme Court of India, on November 6, delivered a significant order in an ongoing case concerning encroachments in the Megamalai Reserve Forest in Tamil Nadu. The Court drew a clear line between genuine forest dwellers entitled to protection under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA) and those cultivating commercial crops within forest boundaries - holding that the latter cannot use such cultivation to claim a right to remain in the forest area.
Background
The matter arises from Civil Appeal No(S). 6395-6397 of 2025, filed before the Supreme Court. Earlier, on May 29, 2026, the Court had issued detailed directions for a time-bound process of eviction, rehabilitation, and ecological restoration in the Agasthyamalai landscape. Following that, fresh applications were filed raising questions about the applicability of the FRA, 2006 for people residing in and cultivating land within the Megamalai region.
The State of Tamil Nadu, through its Revenue and Social Justice Departments, placed its response before the Court as directed. The case involves over 4,500 persons occupying more than 5,000 hectares of forest land - a significant portion of which is under silk cotton cultivation.
A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta noted three categories of occupants identified in the State’s affidavit: Category I consists of persons permanently residing inside the forest and cultivating; Category II includes persons cultivating with only temporary residence; and Category III covers persons residing entirely outside the forest boundary but cultivating inside it.
The Court found that as many as 2,767 persons - falling under Category III - reside outside the forest boundary yet manage silk cotton cultivation inside. This, the Court observed, was difficult to explain without external financing or facilitation.
“The concept of planned cultivation of commercial crop is totally contrary to the very concept of a naturally occurring minor forest produce. If commercial crops are permitted and allowed to be cultivated in the forest areas, the very nature of the forest is bound to change,” the Court observed.
On the State’s claim that silk cotton qualifies as “minor forest produce” under Section 2(i) of the FRA, the Court was unimpressed. It noted that no specific notification demonstrated silk cotton as a recognised minor forest produce under any forest law. “What emerges from the affidavits is the promotion and sponsored cultivation of silk cotton as a commercial crop, rather than traditional collection of the various parts of the tree as minor forest produce,” the bench noted.
The Court also criticised the State Government’s prolonged inaction, observing that the process for constituting Gram Sabhas under Section 6 of the FRA had not been initiated for years even after a Madras High Court stay was vacated in 2016, and that the exercise appeared to have been triggered only after this Court’s intervention.
The Court passed the following key directions:
- Persons in Category II and Category III are excluded from consideration as Forest Dwelling Scheduled Tribes (FDST) or Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFD) under the FRA, 2006.
- The State Government was granted 30 days to complete formation of remaining Gram Sabhas, after which claims adjudication must conclude within five months.
- A Special Committee has been constituted, headed by Justice B.R. Gavai, former Chief Justice of India, to supervise the claims process, to be assisted by an officer of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Tamil Nadu.
- The CEC was directed to give its opinion on whether silk cotton qualifies as a minor forest produce.
- On the NHAI’s application regarding the NH-744 Puliara–Edamon tunnel project, the CEC was directed to examine and respond before the next hearing.
- The State Law Department was impleaded as a party respondent, and the monitoring responsibility under paragraph 66(iii) of the May 2026 order was reassigned to the Environment, Climate Change and Forests Department through the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.
The matter has been listed for the next hearing on February 1, 2027.
