The Karnataka High Court has recently emphasized the importance of elephant corridors, stating that they are not just mere pathways, but vital components of the elephants’ natural habitat and survival. The court asserted that these animals should not be seen as mere inhabitants without rights, whose homes can be easily displaced.
Justices D.K. Singh and H. Shanthi Bhushan remarked on the need to promote development and urban growth while also safeguarding environmental interests and the species that inhabit these areas.
This observation came during hearings concerning land acquisition for a housing project in Anekal taluka, located in the Bengaluru urban district. Local landowners raised objections against the acquisition, arguing that the land is primarily used for agricultural and horticultural activities, which serve as their main source of income. Initially, the court had paused the acquisition process based on a letter from the Deputy Conservator of Forests at Bannerghatta National Park, which indicated that the eco-sensitive zone was situated 10 kilometers from the park’s boundary.
In its order dated August 29, the bench reiterated that while land acquisition should aim for the greater public good and can be pursued for various projects deemed necessary, no public interest should overshadow the goals of environmental and ecological preservation.
Upon canceling the land acquisition proceedings, the court described the residential project as “misconceived” and likely to result in “irreversible ecological, environmental and wildlife-related consequences,” particularly since the project site lies within the eco-sensitive zone of Bannerghatta National Park. The court pointed out that human existence relies on more than just housing; it also depends on ecology, wildlife, forests, and water sources.
The Karnataka Housing Board subsequently received limited environmental clearance from state authorities. On January 13, the high court allowed the acquisition process for agricultural lands to proceed after the Kerala Housing Board submitted an affidavit confirming that the acquisition would comply with necessary environmental regulations. This led to the annulment of earlier proceedings for lands repurposed for non-agricultural use.
Both the landowners and the Karnataka Housing Board expressed dissatisfaction with the high court’s ruling and submitted appeals against the decision. Following this, the Karnataka Housing Board secured environmental clearance specifically for the agricultural lands.
The judgment underscored the significance of Bannerghatta National Park, noting its support for a diverse array of wildlife, including Asian elephants, leopards, and various avian species. The park holds particular importance as a habitat for elephants and is part of the Mysore Elephant Reserve.
The court noted that the proposed project would have detrimental effects on the Karadikkal-Madeshwara Elephant Corridor. Furthermore, the Karnataka Forest Department had already raised concerns about the potential for increased human-wildlife conflict stemming from the housing development, which the project approval seemed to overlook.
The bench emphasized that elephant corridors are crucial ecological connections necessary for the long-term conservation of both elephants and the ecosystems they rely on. The ruling highlighted that protecting these corridors serves a wider purpose of maintaining landscape connectivity, ecological resilience, and the integrity of interconnected forest ecosystems.
The high court concluded that the land acquisition efforts were merely procedural, lacking the essential assessments such as environmental impact studies and consideration of socio-ecological factors.
