The Supreme Court has asked the Union Government to explain how housing promised under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, can align with the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, which restricts permanent constructions in forest areas. Hearing Sugra Adiwasi & Ors. v. Pathranand & Ors., a bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar directed the Ministries of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and Tribal Affairs to consult and file an affidavit within four weeks outlining a framework that balances housing needs of forest dwellers with conservation laws. The case is reported as 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 995.
Courts are becoming key players in climate action, with nearly 3,000 cases filed worldwide by mid-2025. Judicial intervention addresses gaps left by weak political enforcement, as seen in landmark cases like Urgenda and Lliuya. Using human rights and tort law, courts hold governments and companies accountable without making policy. Critics’ concerns about overreach are countered by courts’ reliance on expert evidence. Strengthening climate litigation requires specialized climate courts, clear legal targets, and corporate risk integration. The article argues that judicial oversight is essential to turn climate promises into real action.
In a significant development related to industrial activity in eco-sensitive areas, the Supreme Court recently allowed M/s Alankar Granites to withdraw its Special Leave Petition (SLP)…
