LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 20 March 2026

Whether the land which is not a forest land as per revenue record or a declared forest nor fulfilling the requirement of a deemed forest, when the same is earmarked for execution of a project under a Master Plan, could with the efflux of time be declared as deemed forest, overriding the statutory binding force and sanctity of the said Master Plan?

NAVEEN SOLANKI AND ANOTHER v. RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS
2026 INSC 270 · CIVIL APPEAL NO.10656 OF 2024
Coram: Augustine George Masih; Dipankar Datta
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.2 Forest (Conservation) Act, 1…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

No. Land earmarked for execution of a project under an approved Master Plan, which is not forest land as per revenue record or a declared forest nor fulfilling the requirement of a deemed forest at the time of coming into force of that Master Plan, cannot subsequently be declared a forest or a deemed forest overriding the statutory binding force and sanctity of the Master Plan. Without changing the Master Plan in accordance with law, changes brought about by natural or human intervention have no impact whatsoever on the project.

Headnote

Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — s.2 — Master Plan of Delhi, 2021 — "Forest land" — "Deemed forest" — Statutory binding force and sanctity of the Master Plan — Relevant date — Invasive alien species — Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — s.2 — Land earmarked under an approved Master Plan — Efflux of time — Held: Land which is not forest land as per revenue record or a declared forest, nor fulfils the requirement of a deemed forest when a Master Plan comes into force, cannot with the efflux of time be declared a deemed forest. Changes on the ground due to natural or human intervention cannot override the statutory binding force and sanctity of the Master Plan. (¶47, 65) Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — s.2 — Determination of "deemed forest" — Relevant date — Held further: The relevant date for determining the nature of the land as deemed forest is the date of coming into force of the Master Plan, not the date work on the project is initiated on the ground. Absent contemporaneous material that the land bore the character of forest then, no prior approval of the Central Government is required. (¶60, 65) Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — s.2 — Invasive alien species — Natural forest ecosystem — Held further: Mere presence of vegetation or tree cover, particularly invasive alien species introduced through historical human intervention, cannot by itself be equated with the existence of a natural forest ecosystem. Transplantation of native species and compensatory afforestation directed; appeal disposed of. (¶54, 66, 67)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 25The issues, therefore, that arise for determination are:
Paragraph 47It can, in the above conspectus, be concluded that without changing the Master Plan in accordance with law, if the non-use or use of land leads to some changes due to natural or human intervention, the same shall have no impact, what so ever on the project as and when the same is to be executed in pursuance of and in accordance with the Master Plan. In other words, the sanctity and statutory binding force of the Master Plan will have primacy and shall prevail.
Paragraph 65The issues as framed in paragraph 25 of the judgment are, thus, answered as follows:
Acts & Sections
s.2 Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980s.1A Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980s.22 National Green Tribunal Act, 2010s.2(i) Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of NAVEEN SOLANKI AND ANOTHER v. RAIL LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Which would be the relevant date for consideration and determination of the nature of the land as ‘deemed forest’ i.e., the date of coming into force of the Master Plan or the date on which the actual work on the project, as earmarked under the Master Plan, is initiated on the ground?Under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, does proliferation of vegetation consisting of invasive alien species signify the presence of a natural forest ecosystem?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections