Supreme Court Orders Protection of Orans and Sacred Groves
Why focus: Landmark SC judgment. Highly format-friendly for Match-the-Following on regional sacred grove terms (orans/rundhs) vs states. GS3 Env.
In News
What Happened
Why It Matters
Background
History & Context
What Changed
- ▶
BEFORE: Sacred groves like Orans were largely classified as revenue wastelands, making them vulnerable to acquisition for solar or wind energy projects. NOW: They must be officially mapped via satellite and notified as 'forests' under the Forest (Conservation) Act, based on their cultural and ecological purpose rather than a minimum size requirement.
- ▶
BEFORE: Community conservation lacked formal statutory backing against state land diversion. NOW: The Court explicitly recommended protecting these groves as 'Community Reserves' under Section 36-C of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, providing legal protection while maintaining community rights.
- ▶
BEFORE: State implementation of forest identification was slow, fragmented, and lacked independent oversight. NOW: The Court ordered the constitution of a 5-member execution committee, headed by a retired High Court judge, to strictly enforce the mapping and notification process.
Prelims Angle
NCERT Connection
Practice Questions
Q1
With Reference ToWith reference to the Supreme Court's December 2024 judgment on Orans and sacred groves, consider the following statements: 1. The Court ruled that the classification of a sacred grove as a forest is strictly dependent on it having a minimum area of 5 hectares. 2. The Court recommended declaring these sacred groves as Community Reserves under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. 3. The judgment mandates the creation of a 5-member execution committee headed by the Union Minister of Environment. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?