The 2023 Amendment, and What Section 1A Took Out

In one line

Parliament renamed the Act, defined the land it covers, and then took two whole categories of land out of it.

In the wording a student can write in an exam: the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023, renamed the statute the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, inserted section 1A to state what land the Act covers and what it does not, inserted sections 3A, 3B and 3C to provide a penalty, liability for authorities and Government departments and a power of direction, and widened the exclusions from "non-forest purpose" in section 2.

Section 1A(1): what is covered

Two clauses, and they are the whole of the Act's new reach.

Clause (a): land that has been declared or notified as a forest in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, or under any other law for the time being in force.

Clause (b): land that is not covered under clause (a), but has been recorded in Government record as forest, as on or after the 25th October, 1980.

The proviso to clause (b) takes out land changed from forest use to non-forest use on or before 12 December 1996 in pursuance of an order issued by an authority authorised by a State Government or Union territory Administration.

The Explanation defines "Government record" as a record held by the Revenue Department or the Forest Department of the State Government or Union territory Administration, or any authority, local body, community or council recognised by it.

Now compare that with Godavarman. The order of 12 December 1996 made the Act apply to forest in the dictionary sense, whatever the record said. Section 1A applies it to land declared, notified or recorded. Land that is forest in fact but appears in no record is outside clause (a) and outside clause (b), and the date in the proviso is the date of the Godavarman order itself, which regularises diversions ordered before it.

Whether that is a valid narrowing of a judicially declared meaning is the question, and an LL.M. answer should put it that way rather than assert an answer. Parliament may define a term in its own statute; a court's construction of an undefined term does not bind Parliament for the future. The counter-argument is that the reading was not merely a construction but a protection extended under Article 21 and Article 48A, and that a statute cannot withdraw a protection so grounded. The matter has been before the Supreme Court and an answer should say that the question is live rather than settled.

Section 1A(2): what is taken out

Clause (a). Forest land alongside a rail line or a public road maintained by the Government, which provides access to a habitation or to a rail and roadside amenity, up to a maximum size of 0.10 hectare in each case.