By Shatakshi Gawade
Is there even room for surprise anymore? One meeting after another, one headline after the next – it’s all more of the same: land lost, trees felled, wildlife pushed closer to the brink.
Just as we were beginning to recover from the Kancha Gachibowli debacle (see Sanctuary Asia April 2025), came news of yet another blow – this time from the Maharashtra State Board for Wildlife (SBWL). In one sweeping move, four massive projects have been approved, threatening over 1,800 ha. of forest and the felling of at least 400,000 trees, reported the Hindustan Times.
What’s at stake? A dam to cater to Mumbai’s endless water demands, two mining projects, and a road to service power lines. The cost? Forests, biodiversity, and the ecological future of generations to come. Such decisions could seriously damage Maharashtra’s long-term economic and ecological security because forests sponge the life-giving monsoons, feed our rivers and aquifers, sequester carbon and serve as catchments for the state’s 2,117 constructed large dams, almost all of which are unable to meet the promised cost-benefit claims made to justify their original construction. Which is why we believe, for example, that the clearance given by Maharashtra to the infamous Gargai dam – previously rejected by the BMC – must not be revived. Tragically, most environmental ‘victories’ prove to be temporary, while our ecological losses end up being permanent!
When we asked Rajiv Pandit, the Founder of Maharashtra-based environment NGO Jividha, why these forests are important, he laughed resignedly, and said, “The effect of these projects on ecology will be beyond what words can describe. The Forest Owlet, an endemic species, lives in the Tansa Sanctuary (the dam will affect this Protected Area). Riverine ecosystems will be destroyed.” And the effect on tiger corridors? “The tiger carrying capacity of Tadoba has reached its limit, the tiger has to migrate now. In the absence of corridors, it will be isolated, and the likelihood of conflict with neighbouring settlements will increase. In case of losses, compensations will go up, putting a stress on the economy. And if compensation is not given, the chances of tigers being killed shoot up!” he shared.
Photo: Kedar Gore.
The four projects cleared by the Maharashtra SBWL will be sent to the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) for approval. They are part of a steady increase in clearances from State and National Wildlife Boards. In an analysis of 800 projects, Scroll wrote that from 2011 to 2013, the NBWL rejected about four per cent projects that came to it. Between 2014 and 2016, clearances dropped to one per cent. The analysis also revealed that after 2014, dissent against large ecocidal projects began to be virtually ignored.
Pandit shared congruent and worrying insights about the functioning of the SBWL: “Board members used to get the agenda of the meeting well in advance, allowing them to study upcoming proposals. Now they don’t even have time to think and prepare their say. It’s as though the matter is already decided by the time it reaches the members.”
Debi Goenka, Executive Trustee of Conservation Action Trust, affirmed that these projects were cleared without discussions. The SBWL, formed under the Wildlife Protection Act (1972), has representation from reputed wildlife experts and organisations. Goenka alleged, that the non-government representatives on the SBWL “failed to object to the government treating them as ‘green rubber stamps’”, reported the Free Press Journal.
In his very first judgement since taking oath as the Chief Justice of India, Bhushan R. Gavai ruled in favour of forests. Through the May 15, 2025 judgement, the Supreme Court directed all State Governments and Union Territories to “hand over the possession of the lands which are recorded as ‘Forest Land’ and which are in possession of the Revenue Department to the Forest Department” for forestry purposes.
The bench, which also had justices Augustine George Masih and K. Vinod Chandran, was hearing a 30-year-old case concerning reserved forest land in Kondhwa Budruk, Pune that was handed over by the Government of Maharashtra to private parties for non-forest activities. The Supreme Court declared the allotment and sale of the 11.89 ha. land is totally illegal! The land is to be handed back to the Forest Department within three months.
The Court pronounced that the then Minister for Revenue, Government of Maharashtra and the then Divisional Commissioner, Pune have acted in breach of public trust to illegally result in gain to private individuals at the cost of precious forest land. The judgement made a scathing comment on the case: “The present matter is a classic example as to how the nexus between the Politicians, Bureaucrats and the Builders can result in the conversion of precious Forest Land for commercial purposes under the garb of resettlement of people belonging to the backward class from whose ancestors, agricultural land was acquired for public purpose.”
At a time when scientists and globally respected economists highlight the fact that biodiversity and natural ecosystems are vital to counter the worst impacts of climate change, the Supreme Court of India has once more come to the rescue of the long-term ecological security of India.
Since these projects are to be constructed far from the urban gaze, we worry that the level of dedication we saw in Aarey or Kancha Gachibowli may not be possible. Maitreya Ghorpade, a Pune-based environmental lawyer, added a pragmatic perspective to our concerns: “Given the apparent importance of some of the projects, such as the Gargai dam, I’m sure they will push ahead.” But that doesn’t mean there’s no hope, he reminds us.
“Clearances from the SBWL and then the Standing Committee of the NBWL are among the many permissions required. Each of these clearances will give a valid cause of action to approach the court,” he shared. The forest clearance can be challenged, there will be an environmental clearance, at least for some of the projects, that can be challenged, and so on, separately for each project, of course.
For the Gargai dam, for instance, The Times of India reported that three major clearances are needed before tendering can begin – the National Wildlife Board, the state Forest Department, and the Centre’s Forest Advisory Committee (FAC).
“I think a people’s movement along with legal action is the best way,” says Ghorpade. Pandit adds, “A people’s movement will raise awareness about the issue, and highlight public opinion among the political class, but such an andolan alone will not help. We must find information about the procedures followed by the SBWL and challenge them legally.” We have ample evidence to support legal action – Nagrik Chetna Manch, a non-political citizen organisation formed in Pune in 1991, filed an Intervention Application in the Supreme Court in 2007 in the Pune land case, which led the Court to direct the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to investigate, and brought us to the forest judgement from CJI Gavai.
After all, there is strength in numbers – locals, activists, lawyers, media, academicians, all of us need to be present. At the moment our voices are required. We must be involved too. This is not the end of the road.
