Bombay High Court Slams Maharashtra Government Over Forest Rights Act Delay
The Bombay High Court on July 13, 2026, strongly criticized the Maharashtra government for its failure to effectively implement the Forest Rights Act of 2006, attributing the nearly two-decade delay to "sheer callousness" and a "lethargic attitude" by state authorities.
A division bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and Kamal Khata in Mumbai directed the state government to explain the delay and submit a concrete timeline for enforcing the law. The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the non-governmental organization Vanashakti, which seeks the effective implementation of the Act across Maharashtra.
The Forest Rights Act, enacted in 2006, is designed to recognize and vest forest land and resource rights to forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers. The law provides for Individual Forest Rights for cultivation and habitation, alongside Community Forest Resource rights that empower local communities to protect, manage, and sustainably utilize forest resources.
During the hearing, the court noted that despite the law being in force for nearly 20 years, its provisions have not been properly or effectively implemented in Maharashtra. The judges pointed out that the PIL has been pending since April 7, 2014, and the state has failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay.
The bench observed that for over 12 years, the government had offered numerous excuses instead of complying with the mandatory provisions of the Act.
In response, the counsel representing the state government argued that the process of identifying and deciding the rights of tribal communities was still underway. However, the High Court rejected this explanation, stating that determining such rights should not take more than a decade. The bench remarked that such conduct from the concerned authorities was unacceptable.
To address the issue, the High Court directed the Additional Chief Secretary of the Forest Department to file a detailed affidavit explaining why the Act has not yet been effectively implemented. The official must also place on record a specific timeline detailing when the state proposes to enforce the provisions of the law.
The High Court has scheduled the matter for its next hearing on August 6.
