Commercial Silk Cotton Farming Cannot Qualify as Forest Right Under FRA: Supreme Court

Commercial Cultivation Not Protected Under FRA

Examining the State’s reliance on silk cotton as minor forest produce, the Bench observed that the FRA protects traditional rights relating to naturally occurring forest produce and does not recognise planned commercial cultivation as a forest right.

The Court noted that there was no specific notification establishing silk cotton as a recognised minor forest produce under the relevant forest laws. It further observed that the material placed on record indicated organised and sponsored commercial cultivation rather than the traditional collection of forest produce.

The Bench held that historical cultivation alone could not establish a statutory forest right and rejected the argument that commercial silk cotton farming could justify the cultivators’ continued presence inside the forest.

It also stressed that the protection of Megamalai’s critical tiger habitat must receive priority over claims seeking to legitimise encroachments through commercial agricultural activities.

Court Questions State’s Delay in Constituting Gram Sabhas

The Supreme Court also expressed concern over the Tamil Nadu government’s prolonged failure to initiate the constitution of Gram Sabhas under Section 6 of the FRA.

The Bench noted that the process had remained pending for several years even after the Madras High Court’s stay was vacated in 2016. It observed that the exercise appeared to have been initiated only following the Supreme Court’s intervention.

The Court clarified that claims for recognition as Forest Dwelling Scheduled Tribes (FDST) or Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFD) must be examined strictly in accordance with Section 6 of the FRA and its Rules, rather than being determined merely on the basis of present occupation.

Directions Issued by the Supreme Court

To ensure proper verification of forest rights claims, safeguard the ecological integrity of the forest area and ensure compliance with its earlier orders, the Bench issued the following directions:

1. Exclusion of Categories II and III: Persons identified under Categories II and III have been excluded from consideration as FDST or OTFD under the FRA, 2006.
2. Formation of Gram Sabhas: The Tamil Nadu government has been given 30 days to complete the constitution of the remaining Gram Sabhas. The adjudication of forest rights claims must be completed within the subsequent five months.
3. Special Committee: The Court constituted a Special Committee headed by former Chief Justice of India Justice B.R. Gavai to supervise the claims verification process. The committee will be assisted by an officer of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Tamil Nadu.
4. Examination of Silk Cotton: The CEC has been directed to submit its opinion on whether silk cotton qualifies as minor forest produce under the FRA.
5. NH-744 Tunnel Project: The CEC has also been asked to examine the National Highways Authority of India’s application concerning the proposed Puliara–Edamon tunnel project on NH-744 and submit its response before the next hearing.
6. Change in Monitoring Responsibility: The State Law Department has been impleaded as a party respondent. The monitoring responsibility assigned under paragraph 66(iii) of the May 2026 order has been transferred to the Environment, Climate Change and Forests Department through the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.

The latest directions reinforce the distinction between statutory forest rights and commercial exploitation of protected forest land, while advancing the larger process of eviction, rehabilitation and ecological restoration ordered in the Agasthyamalai landscape.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on February 1, 2027, when the Court is expected to consider an interim status report on compliance with its directions.