Supreme Court Orders Uttarakhand to Restore Corbett Tiger Reserve, Demolish Illegal Constructions

The Supreme Court has directed the Uttarakhand government to repair the ecological damage caused inside the Corbett Tiger Reserve due to illegal construction and large-scale tree cutting. The Court also ordered the State to demolish all unauthorised structures inside the reserve.

A Bench led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, along with Justice Vinod Chandran and Justice NV Anjaria, said that the State’s Chief Wildlife Warden must prepare a detailed plan for ecological restoration. This plan must be prepared in consultation with the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and follow expert recommendations. The restoration plan must be submitted within two months.

The Court made it clear that only native and indigenous species should be used while undertaking afforestation in Corbett. It warned the State not to bring in any alien or non-native species that can disturb the ecosystem.

Regarding demolition, the Court said that clearing of all illegal construction identified by the Expert Committee must begin within three months.

Tiger Safari restrictions

The Supreme Court also examined the recommendations of its Expert Committee on Tiger Safaris. It ruled that:

• Tiger Safaris cannot be set up in the core or critical tiger habitat of any reserve.
• Safaris may only be developed on non-forest or degraded forest land in the buffer area, and only if that land is not part of a tiger corridor.
• A safari can operate only when linked to a proper rescue and rehabilitation centre for tigers that need medical care or have been involved in human–wildlife conflict.

The Court also ordered that the entire area of the Corbett Tiger Reserve, including its Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs), must be notified as a “Silence Zone” under the Noise Pollution Rules within three months.

Pan-India directions on tiger conservation

The Supreme Court issued broader guidelines for all Tiger Reserves across India. These include:

• No outsourcing of forest officers for core wildlife functions.
• Tiger Safaris must follow the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) Guidelines of 2019 along with additional conditions.

These extra conditions include:

• Only rescued or conflict tigers from the same landscape should be housed in the safari.
• Veterinary support must be provided through an attached rescue centre.
• Safari operations must be controlled by the Field Director of the respective reserve.
• All earnings must be directed to Tiger Conservation Foundations.
• Enclosures must be designed in a way that prevents contact between wild and captive animals.
• Designs require approval from the Central Zoo Authority.
• Carrying capacity norms must be developed and followed.
• Only electric, hybrid or solar vehicles should be promoted, and vehicle numbers must be regulated.
• Wastewater discharge from safari premises must be completely prohibited.

Eco-Sensitive Zones around all Tiger Reserves

A major direction from the Court was for all States to notify Eco-Sensitive Zones around every Tiger Reserve, including buffer and fringe areas, within one year. The Court said ESZs cannot be limited only to National Parks or Sanctuaries and must extend to peripheral areas of Tiger Reserves as well.

Eco-tourism and restrictions on resorts

On the question of tourism infrastructure near protected forests, the Court said:

• Eco-tourism must be strictly regulated and cannot become mass tourism.
• New eco-friendly resorts may be permitted in buffer zones but not inside designated tiger corridors.
• Homestays and community-run tourism facilities should be encouraged.
• Zero-waste practices must be compulsory.
• Mobile phones should not be allowed in tourism zones inside the core area.
• Visitor vehicle limits must follow NTCA guidelines.
• Night tourism must be completely banned.
• Where roads pass through core tiger habitat, only emergency vehicles may move at night.

Regulating religious tourism in tiger habitats

The Court noted that pilgrimages inside tiger reserves create significant disturbance to wildlife due to heavy footfall. It asked the Centre and States to adopt a balanced approach—protecting wildlife while respecting religious sentiments. It referred to examples like Sariska, where guidelines already exist to regulate religious movement inside core areas.

Final directions

The Supreme Court instructed both the Central and State governments to implement all directions issued. However, it also allowed States to make minor modifications based on local needs after consulting the Wildlife Institute of India and NTCA.