Delhi High Court Seeks Centre’s Reply on PIL Challenging Denotification of Protected Forest Areas

New Delhi, July 9: The Delhi High Court has sought the Centre's response to a public interest litigation (PIL) alleging that the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) and its Standing Committee have been permitting the large-scale diversion, reduction and denotification of protected areas, including national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and tiger reserves, in violation of environmental laws and constitutional obligations.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia issued notices to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and the National Board for Wildlife, directing them to file their replies. The matter has been listed for further hearing in September.

The PIL has been filed by ten petitioners, including former IAS and Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers. Senior Advocate Prashanto C. Sen and Advocate Shibani Ghosh represented the petitioners before the Court.

Allegations Against NBWL

The petition contends that the NBWL and its Standing Committee have failed to discharge their statutory and constitutional responsibilities under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

According to the petitioners, while the full National Board is mandated to meet at least once every year, it convened only after a gap of 13 years in 2025. In contrast, its Standing Committee has allegedly been approving proposals for diversion of protected areas with little scrutiny.

The PIL claims that more than 97% of proposals seeking diversion, reduction or denotification of protected areas considered between 2014 and 2026 were approved.

It further alleges that the Standing Committee routinely clears over 100 proposals in a single meeting, effectively functioning as a "clearing house" rather than carrying out a rigorous ecological assessment.

Concerns Over Protected Areas

The petition argues that approvals have been granted for activities such as highways, roads, mobile towers, helipads, mining projects, apartment complexes in eco-sensitive zones, oil drilling, power infrastructure and open-cast mining inside or around ecologically sensitive wildlife habitats.

It specifically refers to the Standing Committee's meeting held on June 26, 2025, where proposals involving approximately 1,730 hectares of land were reportedly approved for multiple infrastructure and mining projects, including developments within a tiger corridor connecting the Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve, Kanhargaon Wildlife Sanctuaryand Tipeshwar Wildlife Sanctuary in Maharashtra.

The petitioners contend that such decisions were taken without adequate scientific evaluation, expert assessment or transparency, undermining the objectives of wildlife conservation.

Article 21 and Environmental Protection

The PIL states that India has over 1,134 protected areas, covering approximately 5.3% of the country's geographical area, which are critical for biodiversity conservation as well as ecological, food and water security.

It argues that by permitting the continued diversion of protected habitats, the Union Government has breached the public trust doctrine and violated the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, which has consistently been interpreted by courts to include the right to a clean and healthy environment.

The petition also asserts that the destruction of protected ecosystems contributes to climate change and adversely affects the environmental rights of present and future generations.

The Delhi High Court will take up the matter again in September, after the Centre and the National Board for Wildlife file their responses.