Abdul Khalek vs The State Of Assam

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NOS. 23647-23648 OF 2025)

ABDUL KHALEK & OTHERS ... APPELLANTS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM & OTHERS … RESPONDENTS

WITH

W.P. (C) NO. 1046 OF 2025

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO. 32624 OF 2025)

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO. 32296 OF 2025)

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO. 32993 OF 2025)

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO. 34412 OF 2025)

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (@ SLP (C) NO. 34556 OF 2025) AND W.P. (C) NO. 65 OF 2026

JUDGMENT

ALOK ARADHE, J.

Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by KAPIL TANDON

Leave granted.

Date: 2026.02.10 17:50:05 IST Reason:

1

2. These appeals and the Writ Petitions raise before this

Court a question of considerable, constitutional and

environmental significance, namely the State’s

obligation to protect reserved forest in discharge of

its constitutional mandate and the manner in which

such obligation must be fulfilled, when long standing

human habitation is asserted within the forest land.

3. The appellants and the writ petitioners before this

Court are residents of several villages which are

situate in Doyang reserved forest, South Nambar

Reserved Forests, Jamuna Madunga Reserve Forest,

Barpani Reserved Forest, Lutumai Reserved Forest

and Gola Ghat Forest in the State of Assam.

According to the appellants/writ petitioners, they

and their predecessors have been residing in the

villages for more than seventy years. The

appellants/writ petitioners contend that their

2 existence and residence have been acknowledged by

issuing Aadhar Cards, ration cards and other

identity documents by the state agencies.

4. On the other hand, the State Government asserts

that the land in occupation of the appellants/writ

petitioners is within reserved forest and

appellants/writ petitioners have no legal right to

occupy the land comprised in the reserved forest. It

is the case of respondents that the forest areas were

notified as reserved forests in the year 1887 and

1888 under the forest laws, then in force. The forest

department of Government of Assam issued eviction

notices to the appellants/writ petitioners, on the

ground that they were unauthorized occupants of

reserved forest land and directed them to vacate the

said lands within a period of seven days from the

date of the receipt of the notices.

3

5. The issuance of eviction notices, particularly the

short time granted for vacating the land, prompted

the appellants before us to approach the Gauhati

High Court by filing writ petitions under Article 226

of the Constitution of India. The validity of eviction

notices was challenged, inter alia on the ground that

the same were arbitrary, violative of principles of

natural justice and issued without affording any

prior opportunity of hearing or adjudication of their

claimed rights over the land.

6. The State resisted the writ petitions by contending

that the large scale and systematic encroachments

have taken place within the reserved forest area

across the State of Assam. It was asserted that

unauthorized occupants have cleared the forest land

and diverted it for residential, agriculture and other

non forest purposes, causing serious environmental

4 degradation. The State in support of its claim placed

statistical data on record to indicate that

approximately 3,62,082 hectares of forest land was

under encroachment and nearly 19.92% of the forest

area in the State is affected. The State further

submitted that in order to discharge its

constitutional and environmental obligations, it has

taken a policy decision to remove all unauthorised

encroachments from the reserved forest and to

restore such lands through reforestation and

conservation measures.

7. The learned Single Judge by an interim order dated

29.07.2025 passed in W.P. (C) No. 4257 of 2025,

extended the time to vacate the land in question till

07.08.2025. The aforesaid order was challenged in

an appeal namely, W.A. No. 251 of 2025. The

Division Bench of the High Court, by an order dated

5 18.08.2025, directed the State Government to frame

necessary regulations to prevent unauthorised

encroachment of reserved forests land and further

directed the respondents to issue show cause notices

to the appellants, granting them 15 days time to

submit an explanation and a further period of 15

days to vacate the same in case they are asked to do

so. The aforesaid order passed by the Division Bench

is under challenge in the appeal @ S.L.P. No. 32624

of 2025.

8. The writ petitions preferred by the other appellants

in remaining appeals were disposed of by learned

Single Judge with liberty to the appellants to submit

the representations and the respondents were

directed to consider the representations. The

appellants in other appeals have approached this

Court directly by filing Special Leave Petitions

6 without filing the writ appeals before the Division

Bench of the High Court. The writ petitioners have

also directly approached this Court by filing writ

petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India

inter alia praying for restraining the respondents

from carrying on any eviction or coercive action

against the writ petitioners. In the aforesaid factual

background, the appeals and the Writ Petitions arise

for our consideration.

9. Forests constitute one of the most vital natural

resources of the nation. They are not merely

repositories of timber or land capable of alternate

use, but complex ecological systems indispensable

for maintaining environmental balance. Forests

regulate climate, preserve biodiversity, recharge

groundwater, prevent soil erosion, and act as natural

carbon sinks mitigating the adverse effects of climate

7 change. In a country as ecologically diverse and

climatically vulnerable as India, the role of forests

assumes even greater significance. Encroachment

upon forest land has emerged as one of the gravest

challenges confronting environmental governance in

the country. The Constitution casts a clear and

unequivocal obligation upon the state to protect

forest and the environment. Article 48A, forming part

of Directive Principles of State Policy, mandates that

the State shall endeavor to protect and improve the

environment and to safeguard the forests and wild

life of the country. Though, Directive Principles are

not enforceable by Courts, they are fundamental in

governance of the country and must guide the State

in formulation and implementation of policy. Article

51A(g) of the Constitution imposes a fundamental

duty upon every citizen to protect and improve the

natural environment, including forests. These 8 constitutional provision reflect a collective

responsibility on the part of citizen as well as the

State to prevent, regulate and remedy the

environmental harm.

10. At the same time, constitutional governance

demands that environmental protection be pursued

through lawful means. The mandate to clear the

encroachments from the forest land does not

authorise an arbitrary action. The Constitution does

not envisage a choice between the environmental

protection and the rule of law, rather, it insists that

both co-exist and reinforce each other.

11.We had heard learned senior counsel for the

appellants/writ petitioners as well as learned

Solicitor General on 16.01.2026, and had expressed

our concern to maintain the rule of law while

ensuring protection of environment. Thereupon

9 learned Solicitor General sought time to seek

instructions and has filed an additional affidavit on

18.01.2026. Paras 3 to 9 of the said additional

affidavit read as under:-

“3 .That this is the Constitutional obligation of the State Government, more particularly in light of the fact that as per the statistics given by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India. As per the data 3,62,082.62 hectares is under encroachment, in other words, a total of 19.92% of forest area is under unauthorised illegal encroachment. It is Constitutionally imperative that this unauthorized and illegal occupation as well as continuing illegal and unauthorised non forest activities are immediately removed.

3.1 That the first step for removal is to issue a notice on the alleged unauthorised occupant to enable him to show the evidence of him being in authorised occupation of the forest land. 3.2 That the recipient of the notice comes before a Committee of forest officials as well as revenue officials and produces the evidence, if any, available with him which can according to the notice, entitle him to stay in the Reserved Forest areas.

4. That the actions are taken for removal of encroachment areas only, if it is found that there is an illegal and unauthorised encroachment in the Reserved Forest area. If the land of the 10 noticee is found to be within revenue limits, outside the notified forest area, the details are sent to the Revenue Department and the present drive which is confined only to evicting the Reserved Forest area has nothing to do with what the Revenue Department may or may not do thereafter.

5. That if the notice is found to be in unauthorised occupation of a Reserved Forest area, after scrutinising the documents placed by him, a Speaking Order is passed and served upon him giving him 15 days notice to vacate the unauthorised occupation. It is only thereafter that the actions are taken to remove the unauthorised occupants.

6. That so far as the controversy concerning existence of some Gaon Panchayat is concerned, it is submitted that there can be a Gaon Panchayat in a forest area. This is provided for in Section 5 in Assam Panchayat Act, 1994.

“5. Establishment of Gaon Panchayat – (1) The State Government may, by notification, declare any local area comprising a revenue village or a group of revenue village or a Forest villager or Tea Garden area or hamlets forming part of revenue village or Forest village or Tea Garden area or other such administrative unit or part thereof to be a Gaon Panchayat with population of its territory not less that six thousand and more that ten thousand;….”

7. That the concept of a Forest Village is a unique concept in Assam. A person entitled to stay in forest village finds his name mentioned in the 11 statutory register called ‘Jamabandi Register’ maintained by the Forest Department for the forest village and the person holds a document for the land under possession. Additionally, the title holders under Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 are also legally authorised to occupy the forest land and are not liable for eviction. The rights mentioned above are inheritable but not alienable or transferable.

8. That individual whose name is mentioned in this register or hold rights under Forest Rights Act, 2006 are not unauthorised occupants. However, there are several unauthorised inhabitants who have encroached upon lands outside the Gaon Panchayat limits and in some cases inside the Gaon Panchayat limits which fall within the boundaries of Reserved Forests.

9. That it may be pointed out that a right to reside in Reserved Forest areas falling within a Gaon Panchayat is inheritable but non-transferable. There would be a separate set of documentary evidence showing authorised occupation within Reserved Forest areas which are falling under a Gaon Panchayat. Any unauthorised occupant residing inside Reserved Forest areas albeit falling under a Gaon Panchayat is liable to be evicted following the same procedure as pointed out above.”

12

12.Thus, from perusal of aforesaid additional affidavit

filed on behalf of the respondents, the following

policy decision to remove unauthorised occupation

from the reserved forest has been taken:

(i) The respondents shall constitute a committee

comprising forest officials and the revenue officials.

(ii) The said committee shall issue notice to the

alleged unauthorised occupants and shall give them

an opportunity to adduce evidence to show that they

have the right to occupy the land which is in their

possession.

(iii) The action for removal of encroachment shall be

taken, only if it is found that there is an

encroachment in the reserved forest area.

(iv) In case the noticee is found to be within the

revenue limits, outside the notified forest area, the

details of the noticee shall be sent to the revenue 13 department. In such cases, revenue department

shall decide the future course of action.

(v) The action is being taken by the State to remove

encroachment from the reserved forest areas and has

nothing to do in respect of the matters which may be

referred to the revenue department.

(vi) If an unauthorised occupation is found in a

reserved forest area, after scrutiny of the documents,

a speaking order shall be passed and shall be served

on the concerned person giving him 15 days notice

to vacate the unauthorized occupation and only after

expiry of the period of notice, the action shall be

taken to remove the unauthorised occupants.

(vii) Occupation of a Gaon Panchayat in a forest is

permissible if there is a sufficient proof as per the

Jamabandi Register maintained by the Forest

14 Department or as provided under the Forest Rights

Act.

13. In our opinion, the course of action to be adopted by

the State Government while removing the

encroachment from the reserved forest contains

sufficient procedural safeguards. The process sought

to be adopted by the State Government for removal

of encroachment conforms to the principles of

fairness, reasonableness and due process. Learned

Solicitor General has assured us that the mechanism

evolved by the State shall be complied with

objectively and with fairness while taking action for

removal of unauthorised occupation in the reserved

forests. The parties are directed to maintain status

quo in respect of land in occupation of the

appellants/writ petitioners till speaking order is

passed and till expiry of notice period of 15 days. All

15 contentions are kept open to be agitated before the

committee. It is clarified that this Court has not

expressed any opinion on merits of the claim of the

parties, as the same has to be examined by the

committee.

14. Accordingly, the judgment dated 18.08.2025 passed

by the Division Bench and orders dated 03.11.2025,

06.11.2025, 12.11.2025 and 17.11.2025 passed in

W.P. (C) Nos. 6191/2025, 6192/2025, 6418/2025

and W.P. (C) No.6167/2025 respectively, by learned

Single Judge, of the High Court, are substituted and

modified.

15. In view of the mechanism evolved by the State for

taking action for removal of unauthorised occupation

in reserved forests, as recorded in our order, it is not

necessary to consider the writ petitions filed under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India in detail. The

16 writ petitioners will be entitled to avail such

remedies as may be permissible in law.

16. Accordingly, the appeals as well as Writ Petitions

are disposed of.

17.There shall be no order as to costs.

…..…….……………….………….……….J. [PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA]

.……………………………….….……..….J. [ALOK ARADHE]

NEW DELHI;

FEBRUARY 10, 2026.

17