MoEFCC’s latest FCA rules expand state powers to divert forest land and dilute compensatory afforestation safeguards, despite Supreme Court directives
The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has issued the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Amendment Rules, 2025. These revised Forest Conservation Amendment (FCA) rules broaden the authority of state governments to divert forest land for infrastructure development, while simultaneously diluting the safeguards linked to compensatory afforestation.
Expanded Permissions for Linear Projects
A key modification redefines the framework of forest land diversion. Under the new rules, state governments are now empowered to issue initial “working permissions” for linear projects even before receiving final approval. Such permissions cover preliminary activities, including road construction (excluding blacktopping and concretisation), railway track laying, and installation of transmission lines.
Previously, state authorities could mobilize resources for such projects only after securing Stage-I approval. By permitting preparatory works at a much earlier stage, the new framework raises apprehensions of unchecked forest clearance before thorough scrutiny.
Public Interest Clause Raises Concerns
Another major revision introduces a broad and somewhat ambiguous “public interest” clause. Projects deemed to be of defence, strategic, or emergent importance can now bypass conventional layers of public scrutiny. Moreover, applications for such projects may be submitted offline, thereby reducing transparency and public access to critical information.
Experts caution that this provision could effectively shield numerous infrastructure projects from public oversight. It also builds upon a 2024 notification that had already excluded defence and security-related projects from disclosure on the Parivesh portal.
Compensatory Afforestation Rules Weakened
The amendments also dilute the framework for compensatory afforestation (CA). Land afforested in lieu of diverted forest land is no longer required to be formally notified as “protected forest.” Instead, the rules mandate only a mutation in favour of the Forest Department, lowering the bar for long-term ecological protection.
In addition, the rules continue to permit the use of degraded reserved forests to meet CA obligations—a practice that experts argue is inconsistent with the principle of ecological restoration and fails to adequately offset the ecological loss from forest diversion.
At Odds with Supreme Court Orders
Legal experts point out that these changes appear to contravene Supreme Court interim orders dated February 3 and March 4, 2025. The Court had categorically directed that no steps be taken to reduce forest land unless compensatory land for afforestation was simultaneously provided by the Centre or respective state governments.
Despite these judicial directions, the new amendment rules seem to dilute established safeguards, potentially paving the way for further depletion of India’s forest cover.
