1  

REPORTABLE  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION  

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3840 OF 2014   IN  

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 202 OF 1995    

IN RE:  T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD       …. PETITIONER(S)    

VERSUS    

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.        … RESPONDENT(S)      IN RE:  STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH         …. APPLICANT (S)    

VERSUS    

SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF   ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS        … RESPONDENT(S)        

O R D E R     Deepak Gupta J.  

1. By means of this application the State of Himachal Pradesh  

has prayed that it may be permitted to carry out silviculture  

felling including thinning and other cultural operations in

2  

accordance with the Working Plan approved by the Government  

of India up to an elevation of 1500 metres above Mean Sea Level  

(MSL) in Chil Pine, Khair and broad-leaved forests only.  

2. On 12.12.1996, this Court issued directions to a large  

number of States.  The relevant directions with regard to the  

State of Himachal Pradesh read as follows:  

“1. There will be no felling of trees permitted in any  

forest, public or private. This ban will not affect felling  

in any private plantation comprising of trees planted in  

any area which is not a forest; and which has not been  

converted from an earlier "forest". This ban will not  

apply to permits granted to the right holders for their  

bonafide personal use in Himachal Pradesh.   

2. In a ‘forest’, the State Government may either  

departmentally or through the State Forest  

Corporation remove fallen trees or fell and remove  

diseased or dry standing timber from areas other than  

those notified under Section 18 or 35 of the Wild Life  

Protection Act, 1972 or any other Act banning such  

felling or removal of trees.   

3. For this purpose, the State Government is to  

constitute an expert committee comprising a  

representative from MOEF, a representative of the  

State Government, two private experts of eminence  

and the MD of the State Forest Corporation (as  

Member Secretary), who will fix the qualitative and  

quantitative norms for the felling of fallen trees and  

diseased and standing timber. The State shall ensure  

that the trees so felled and removed are in accordance  

with these norms.   

4. Felling of trees in any forest or any clearance of  

forest land in execution of projects shall be in strict  

conformity with the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and

3  

any other laws applying thereto. Moreover, any trees  

so felled, and the disposal of such trees shall be done  

exclusively by the State Forest Corporation and no  

private agency is to be involved in any aspect thereof.”  

3. Despite such order having been passed, the amicus curiae  

on 14.02.2000 submitted before this Court that there were  

reports in the press that the State of Himachal Pradesh had  

passed some orders lifting the ban on felling of trees.  This Court,  

thereafter, issued notice to the State of Himachal Pradesh and  

also made it clear that if any such orders have been passed, the  

operation of the same were stayed and no felling of trees be done.   

In the affidavit filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh, in  

response to the order dated 14.02.2000, it was pointed out that  

the intention of the State was to resume silviculture operations  

consisting of regeneration, felling and thinning of the trees as per  

the Working Plan duly approved.    The State of Himachal  

Pradesh also informed this Court that though the State had  

intended to do silivicultural felling but in actual fact this decision  

has not been given effect to.  It was clearly mentioned that no  

felling of trees has taken place except of those allowed by this  

Court specifically. It is also pertinent to mention that the  

Government of India vide G.O. dated 11.10.2002 suspended the

4  

Working Plan for various States including the State of Himachal  

Pradesh.  The State then approached the Central Empowered  

Committee (for short ‘the CEC”), which advised the State to  

approach this Court for modification or vacation of the earlier  

stay order.  This led to the filing of the present application.  

4. After this application was filed, this Court directed the CEC  

to file its report.  The CEC, in its report dated 06.07.2017 has  

made the following recommendations:  

“i) the permission for silvicultural fellings including  thinning in the State of Himachal Pradesh be limited  

to only three working circles of Chil, Sal and Khair  occurring below 1500 MSL to encourage regeneration  of the forests aimed at achieving mixed species forests  

with multi layered canopy having more efficient carbon  sequestration capability;  

ii) no felling of broad leaved species be permitted in the  compartments to be taken up for regeneration fellings  

of the above three working circles or in the  miscellaneous/broad leaved working circle irrespective  of the recommendations in the Working Plan;  

iii) 764 ha. of Eucalyptus trees proposed for felling as  per Working Plan prescriptions be permitted to be  

felled and the same area regenerated with native broad  leaved species;  

iv) rotation of Sal and Chil to be 120 years and are  worked under irregular shelterwood system;  

v) rotation age of Khair be kept at 30 years with  minimum dia of 25 cms. at breast height;  

vi) there will be total ban on burning of debris  

including after seeding or over wood felling in order to  encourage natural regeneration of broad leaved species  and reduce soil erosion;

5  

vii) no felling to be undertaken in Ban oak forests and  other broad leaved forests other than Sal and Khair;  

viii) planting component in Assisted Natural  Regeneration shall include more than 50% seedings of  

native broad leaved and multipurpose use species  other than that of the principal species;  

ix) the removal of Lantana weed to be an integral  component of regeneration felling and the removal of  

Lantana has to be completed before the felling  operations commence, so that the regeneration of the  felled area is taken up forthwith;  

x) in Khair working circle a minimum of 50 healthy  

trees per ha. are identified in advance, at least two  years prior to the proposed felling in the compartment  and labelled as mother trees or standards and these  

trees are not permitted to be lopped thereafter;  

xi) the size of the compartment to be taken up for  

regeneration felling in a given year shall not exceed 20  ha..  If any compartment is more than 20 ha. in area,  

it can be sub-divided into two or more units so as to  avoid creation of large gaps in canopy of forests in a  given location;   

xii) the felling operations in the adjoining forest  area/compartment of the already felled  

area/compartment be taken up only after five years of  regeneration felling in the given compartment and after  

ensuring that the regeneration is established in the  already cleared forest area;  

xiii) adequate soil and moisture conservation measures  are to be undertaken in regeneration area;  

xiv) no green fellings are to be carried out in steep  slopes and along streams and nallas as per the  

standard prescription in the Working Plan code and in  the forest areas falling under Protection cum  Rehabilitation Working Circle;  

xv) State Government shall prepare three separate  comprehensive management plans one each for Chil,  

Sal and Khair respectively covering the entire forest  area falling below 1500 MSL incorporating revised set  

of prescriptions as detailed in this report as one time  exercise and after obtaining approval of MoEF&CC,  integrate the same with the Working Plans of

6  

respective forest divisions for operational purposes;  and  

xvi) State Government shall submit an undertaking in  the form of an Affidavit before the Hon’ble Supreme  

Court ensuring sufficient budgetary provisions for  undertaking regeneration of the felled area in the  

financial year following the felling year.”  

5. The report filed by the CEC was considered by this Court on  

12.09.2017 when learned counsel appearing for the State of  

Himachal Pradesh submitted that he would file an affidavit  

identifying three working circles in different areas of the State.   

After this affidavit was filed, we realised that circles covered a  

large area and the State was directed to file an affidavit giving the  

areas covered by each circle and also the area of each range/beat  

in the circle.  On perusal of the affidavit it was found that each  

forest circle comprises of a very large area covering more than  

one district in the State, which would entail felling of large  

number of trees. Thereafter, on 04.12.2017, the State was  

directed to identify two or three ranges where the process of  

silviculture felling may be carried out, the area of each of those  

ranges, the number of beats in each range and the area of each  

beat.   

7  

6. Affidavit has been filed and in this affidavit it has been  

pointed out that for felling of Khair (Acacia Catechu) trees,  

Nurpur Forest Range of Nurpur Forest Division (Dharamshala  

Forest Circle) of District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh has been  

identified.  Khair wood is used commercially in making katha  

and, therefore, the wood of this tree is in great demand.  It has  

been proposed that 80% of trees of 25 cms. diameter and above  

would be felled and remaining 20% of trees of 25 cms. diameter  

and above would be retained to act as mother trees.  It is also  

stated that no other broad-leaved tree shall be felled.  Details  

have been given and it is proposed to carry out felling in the year  

2018-2019 in an area of 903.14 ha. and an area of 706.30 ha.  

has been earmarked for silviculture felling for the year 2019-

2020.   

7. As far as Chil Pine (Pinus Roxburghii) trees are concerned,  

the State of Himachal Pradesh has proposed an area of 49.05 ha.  

for the year 2018-2019 and an area of 23.95 ha. for the year  

2019-2020 for silviculture felling in the Bharari Forest Range of  

Bilaspur Forest Division (Bilaspur Forest Circle) of Bilaspur  

District of Himachal Pradesh.  As far as Chil is concerned, it is

8  

proposed that at least 20-25 mother trees per hectare shall be  

retained.    

8. As far as Sal (Shorea Robusta) trees are concerned, the  

range identified is Paonta Forest Range of Paonta Sahib Forest  

Division (Nahan Forest Circle) of District Sirmour of Himachal  

Pradesh and an area of 176.01 ha. for the year 2018-2019 and  

an area of 120.12 ha. for the year 2019-2020 have been  

earmarked for silviculture felling.    

9. This Court, with a view to protect the forests, had totally  

banned felling of trees.  As per the affidavits filed by the State of  

Himachal Pradesh, some amount of silviculture felling is  

necessary, because if no felling is done then regeneration of trees  

is not as fast as it should be and once the mature trees die after  

reaching their maximum life span, there will be very few young  

trees to replace the old trees.  Felling of trees in India has been  

banned for more than two decades.  We are of the view that on an  

experimental basis we may permit silviculture felling of trees to a  

very limited extent and such felling should be monitored very  

carefully to see whether such silviculture felling actually helps in  

the regeneration of forests or not.  We may also note that the

9  

CEC, in its report, has also permitted felling of trees subject to  

certain conditions.  We may further note that the CEC has  

recommended that the size of the compartment taken up for  

regeneration in a given area shall not exceed 20 hectares and we  

reiterate that the State shall be bound by all the conditions laid  

down by the CEC including the condition that no compartment of  

more than 20 hectares shall be felled at one go.  In addition to  

the conditions laid down by the CEC, the following conditions  

shall be strictly complied with by the State of Himachal Pradesh:  

1. The felling should be done directly by the Forest  

Department or by the Himachal Pradesh State Forest  

Corporation and the work of felling should not be  

handed over or given on contract to any private  

agency;  

2. The Forest Department should ensure that  

videography of each beat where felling is to be done, is  

done separately at regular intervals to clearly indicate  

the condition and state of the forest before felling,  

during felling and after felling;

10  

3. As far as Khair trees are concerned, the State shall  

ensure that at least 25% of mature Khair trees are  

retained as mother trees and these should be marked  

and numbered as trees not to be felled, which should  

be clearly reflected in the videography.  The trees to be  

felled can be marked by a separate colour. The  

number, size and girth of the trees should be clearly  

spelt out;  

4. As far as Chil Pine and Sal trees are concerned, the  

State shall ensure that at least 40 mature trees are  

retained per hectare and the other conditions will be  

the same as applicable to Khair trees;  

5.  In addition to the conditions laid down in the Working  

Plan and those laid down by the CEC, the State of  

Himachal Pradesh shall ensure that adequate funds  

are made available and re-afforestation is done either  

simultaneously or if it is not possible, immediately  

after felling is complete in each block of 20 hectares.   

6. It should also be ensured that these forest areas are  

kept free from grazing and are protected;

11  

7. The State should also ensure that sufficient number of  

healthy saplings are planted so that there is proper  

regeneration of the forest.    

8. This entire programme of experimental silviculture  

felling shall be done under the supervision and  

guidance of a two-Member Committee headed by Shri  

V.P. Mohan, IFS (Retd.), former Principal Chief  

Conservator of Forests, Himachal Pradesh.  The  

second member of this Committee shall be nominated  

by the Vice Chancellor, Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of  

Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan, Himachal  

Pradesh.  The second Member shall be a Professor of  

Silviculture.    

10. The Principal Chief Conservator shall be liable to ensure  

that felling is done strictly in accordance with the orders of this  

Court.  To this limited extent, the orders dated 12.12.1996 and  

14.02.2000 are modified as far as the State of Himachal Pradesh  

is concerned.  

11. The Committee should submit its report to this Court every  

6 months.  The State of Himachal Pradesh shall provide all

12  

facilities to the committee including transport and boarding  

facilities.  The remuneration to be paid to the members of the  

committee shall be determined when the committee submits its  

report.  

12. Registrar Judicial to send the copy of this order to Shri V.P.  

Mohan, IFS (Retd.), former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,  

Himachal Pradesh, Sunny Villa, Nigam Vihar, Shimla-171002  

and Dr. Y.S. Parmar, University of Horticulture and Forestry,  

Nauni, Solan, Himachal Pradesh-173203.  

13.  Accordingly, I.A. is disposed of.  

………………………..J.  (Madan B. Lokur)  

…………………………J.  (Deepak Gupta)  

 New Delhi  February 16, 2018