Kancha Gachibowli aftermath: State government reconstitutes expert committee to identify forest lands
With fewer persons than the previous one, the new 7-member committee is chaired by the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests in charge of IT & Wildlife Protection, and comprises a person nominated by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration and a representative from the National Remote Sensing Agency as members, retired Deputy Conservator of Forests and Officer on Special Duty A.Sankaran as expert member, Deputy Conservator of Forests S. Madhava Rao as expert member and member-convenor, Chief Conservator/Conservator of Forests, Rajanna Sircilla Circle and District Forest Officer, Khammam, as members/field forest officers.
The earlier committee had a wider membership from senior bureaucrats such as the CCLA, GHMC Commissioner, HMDA Metropolitan Commissioner, Commissioner Panchayat Raj, Director, Town & Country Planning, Commissioner of Industries, Commissioner of Agriculture, Commissioner/Director, Tribal Welfare, and Commissioner Horticulture as members and the PCCF and Head of Forest Force as member-convenor.
The membership of the committee earned a serious view from the Apex Court which questioned the representation of so many unrelated departments in the committee to identify forests. The Central Empowered Committee which had submitted its report on the Kancha Gachibowli issue, also recommended reconstitution of the panel with representation of relevant departments.
State-level expert committee constitution to identify forest lands was mandated by the Supreme Court, in the landmark T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad judgement in 1996 which expanded the definition of forest to its dictionary meaning, from the narrow interpretation based on the legal boundaries or ownership.
Several State governments have not constituted expert committees, nor carried out the exercise to identify the deemed forests. With the Central government removing unclassified forests from the legal definition of forests by way of a recent amendment to the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, a public interest litigation was filed in the Supreme Court, invoking the Godavarman Thirumulpad judgement.
The top court directed the State governments and union territories to forward records of the reports of their expert committees, containing the data of the deemed forests to the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, spurring all the States to constitute expert committees now.
The State government issued its first order constituting the previous expert committee on March 15 this year, with one month's time to come up with a report. The latest order does not specify any time limit for the report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
31 minutes ago
- Mint
Federal judge halts Trump administration's deportation flight to war-torn South Sudan hours before takeoff
Federal Judge Randolph Moss issued an emergency order on July 4, 2025, temporarily blocking the deportation of eight migrants to South Sudan just hours before their scheduled 7 PM flight. The dramatic halt came less than 24 hours after the Supreme Court's conservative majority cleared the way for their removal, overriding a Boston judge's protections. The men, from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Sudan and Vietnam, had been held six weeks at Camp Lemonnier, a U.S. military base in Djibouti, where they lived in converted shipping containers amid malaria risks and inadequate medical care. Moss's order, expiring at 4:30 PM ET, allowed time to hear arguments that deporting them to a country where they have no ties violates their due process rights. None of the eight men have connections to South Sudan, a country the U.S. State Department warns Americans to avoid due to rampant violent crime, kidnapping, and active civil war. Their lawyers argued they could face "torture, imprisonment or death" upon arrival, citing UN reports of escalating violence and food shortages. Though all had criminal convictions in the U.S., several had completed sentences and planned voluntary returns to their home countries before being rerouted. The Trump administration claimed "credible diplomatic assurances" from South Sudan about their safety, an assertion immigration advocates dismissed, given the country's instability. This case coincides with mass protests against Trump's immigration policies, with over 260 "Free America" demonstrations occurring nationwide. In Los Angeles, nightly curfews continued after clashes between protesters and 700 Marines deployed by Trump, while New York police arrested 110 protesters outside immigration courts. The "Shut Down ICE" movement saw rallies in 30+ cities, including Kansas City where hundreds blocked streets chanting 'Stop the deportations!' These demonstrations intensified following ICE raids targeting Latino communities, causing several California cities to cancel July 4 celebrations over safety fears. Judge Moss's intervention follows another landmark ruling on July 2, where he blocked Trump's "invasion" proclamation that banned asylum claims at the southern border. That decision—applauded by ACLU lawyers as defending "Congress's power to pass laws"—found Trump lacked authority to create an 'alternative immigration system'. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority has repeatedly backed Trump's deportation agenda, with Justice Sotomayor accusing colleagues of putting the administration "on speed dial" while 'rewarding lawlessness'. These clashes highlight a fractured system where 250+ lawsuits challenge Trump's immigration orders.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Judge blocks immigrants' deportation to South Sudan one day after Supreme Court clears the way
A federal judge on Friday temporarily halted deportations of eight immigrants to war-torn South Sudan the day after the Supreme Court greenlighted their removal, saying new claims by the immigrants' lawyers deserved a hearing. District Judge Randolph Moss proceeded with the extraordinary Fourth of July hearing on Friday afternoon, directing the Trump administration to discuss whether a prior Supreme Court ruling that immigrants slated for removal under an 18th century wartime act invoked by President Donald Trump deserve due process might also apply to those due to be removed to South Sudan. The administration has been trying to deport the immigrants for weeks. None are from South Sudan, which is enmeshed in civil war and where the US government advises no one should travel before making their own funeral arrangements. The government flew them to Djibouti but couldn't move them further because a Massachusetts court had ruled no immigrant could be sent to a new country without a chance to have a court hearing. The Supreme Court vacated that decision last month, then Thursday night issued a new order clarifying that that meant the immigrants could be moved to South Sudan. Lawyers for the immigrants, who hail from Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and other countries, filed an emergency request to halt their removal later that night. The case was assigned to Moss, who issued his order to let the government respond and 'to provide time for a hearing.' That hearing was happening Friday afternoon. The temporary stay was first reported by legal journalist Chris Geidner.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
US federal court pauses deportations to South Sudan, seeks review of due process concerns
A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked the deportation of eight individuals to conflict-ridden South Sudan, citing the need to examine new legal arguments raised by their attorneys. The ruling came a day after the Supreme Court permitted their removal, prompting fresh questions about due process rights under an 18th-century wartime statute invoked by the Trump administration read more A federal judge on Friday temporarily paused the deportation of eight individuals to South Sudan, one day after the Supreme Court authorized their removal. The decision followed new arguments presented by the immigrants' legal team, which the judge determined warranted further review. District Judge Randolph Moss held the unusual Fourth of July hearing Friday afternoon, requesting that the Trump administration address whether a previous Supreme Court decision, regarding due process rights for individuals ordered deported under a historic wartime statute cited by President Donald Trump, might also be applicable in the case of those facing removal to South Sudan. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The administration has been trying to deport the immigrants for weeks. None are from South Sudan, which is enmeshed in civil war and where the US government advises no one should travel before making their own funeral arrangements. The government flew them to Djibouti but couldn't move them further because a Massachusetts court had ruled no immigrant could be sent to a new country without a chance to have a court hearing. The Supreme Court vacated that decision last month, then Thursday night issued a new order clarifying that that meant the immigrants could be moved to South Sudan. Lawyers for the immigrants, who hail from Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and other countries, filed an emergency request to halt their removal later that night. The case was assigned to Moss, who issued his order to let the government respond and 'to provide time for a hearing.' That hearing was happening Friday afternoon. The temporary stay was first reported by legal journalist Chris Geidner.
