Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has directed the Assam Forest Department to file an affidavit explaining why the notification declaring the Garbhanga Reserved Forest in Guwahati as a wildlife sanctuary was cancelled. The affidavit must be submitted by August 5, 2026.
Hearing two separate PILs filed by journalist Rajeev Bhattacharyya and activist Subrata Talukdar, Chief Justice Asutosh Kumar asked Assam Forest Department Standing Counsel KP Pathak to submit the response affidavit before the next hearing and provide an advance copy to the petitioners’ counsel. The petitioners were represented by advocates Vikram Rajkhowa and Mrimoy Khataniar.
“KP Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department seeks some more time to put in the response affidavit indicating the reasons as to why the notification for declaring the Garbhanga Reserved Forest, located in Kamrup (Metro) district, as a wildlife sanctuary, was cancelled,” the court order stated.
“Let such response affidavit be filed positively by the next date with a copy, in advance, to the learned counsel for the petitioners. Re-notify on 05.08.2026,” it added.
In March 2022, the Assam government had issued a preliminary notification declaring around 117 sq km of the Garbhanga Reserved Forest, situated on the outskirts of Guwahati, as a wildlife sanctuary. The forest is home to several wildlife species, including elephants, birds and reptiles.
However, in September 2023, following a state cabinet decision, the preliminary notification was cancelled without citing any specific reason. The forest area borders Meghalaya.
In their PILs, the petitioners referred to several Supreme Court rulings, arguing that once a notification granting protected status is issued, any move to reverse it through de-notification or cancellation requires approval from the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) and the Supreme Court.
The petitioners contended that the decision to withdraw the preliminary notification was “capricious, unreasonable and arbitrary” and sought the court’s intervention. They further alleged that the notification was cancelled at the behest of a senior forest official to facilitate mining activities.
The PILs also claimed that illegal stone mining and the proposed laying of a railway track by Northeast Frontier Railway (NFR) through the forest would threaten the region’s rich biodiversity.