NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Centre, Chhattisgarh government, Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (RRVUNL) and the District Level Forest Rights Committee (DLC) of Surguja on a plea seeking enforcement of community forest rights of villagers living near the Parsa East and Kete Basen (PEKB) coal block.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices on the petition filed by the Hasdeo Aranya Bachao Sangharsh Samiti (HABSS) and six others, challenging an April 21 verdict of the Chhattisgarh High Court.
The petitioners have challenged the High Court’s dismissal of their appeal against, among other issues, the cancellation of community forest rights claimed by residents of Ghatbarra village and subsequent approvals granted for Phase-II mining in the PEKB coal block.
Community forest rights under the Forest Rights Act provide tribal communities and other traditional forest dwellers legal authority to protect, manage and use forest areas traditionally accessed and inhabited by them.
During the hearing, senior advocate C U Singh, appearing for the Samiti, sought the court’s intervention on the issue of the villagers’ forest rights. Chief Justice Surya Kant said the notice was being issued to ascertain whether any community forest right existed in the case.
The Chief Justice observed that if such a right was found to exist, the court would examine what remedial measures could be taken to explore its enforcement.
However, the bench made it clear that the issuance of notice and examination of the community forest rights issue would not affect ongoing mining operations in the PEKB coal block being undertaken by RRVUNL.
The High Court had earlier upheld an October 8, 2025 order of a single judge dismissing a petition challenging the continuation of mining-related approvals in the coal block. It held that concluded proceedings could not be reopened indirectly through a fresh or collateral challenge.
The High Court had relied on the principles of res judicata and finality of litigation, observing that the Samiti’s plea amounted to a collateral challenge to proceedings that had already been settled in earlier cases concerning the same acquisition and mining framework.
It had also noted that the petitioners had not challenged key foundational orders, including forest clearance orders issued in 2011 and 2012 and the Chhattisgarh government’s forest diversion order dated March 28, 2012. The court held that subsequent challenges to consequential actions could not be sustained when the foundational orders had remained unchallenged.
The dispute centres on Ghatbarra, a village predominantly inhabited by tribal communities, where residents had been granted community forest rights under the Forest Rights Act.
The PEKB coal block was allotted to RRVUNL, with forest diversion proposals subsequently receiving approvals in phases. Phase-I mining has already been completed, while approval for Phase-II was granted in February 2022.
The Samiti has alleged that cancellation of the community forest rights and subsequent forest diversion approvals violated mandatory safeguards under the Forest Rights Act, including requirements relating to recognition of forest rights and consent of the Gram Sabha.
The petitioners have also argued that the ecological and cultural losses resulting from the diversion of the forest cannot be adequately compensated through monetary measures.