In 2011, chief minister ordered a 53-hectare iron ore mine in Sehora, Jabalpur to be classified as forestland. The mine belonged to mining baron and MLA Sanjay Pathak. The order meant Pathak could not start mining until he secured an additional, arduous and time-consuming statutory forest clearance from the Union government. This clearance could come through only with the state government’s recommendations to the Centre.

Pathak filed a case in the Jabalpur High Court against the order the same year.

But, even as the case continued in the court, in 2014 Pathak left and joined the He was re-elected as a MLA. In 2015 the High Court asked for the authorities to review the land status, leaving it to the state government to reiterate its stance or change it. The state government did not challenge the orders in the apex court. Instead, with Pathak now a minister in his cabinet, in 2016 Chouhan did a U-turn. He declared that Pathak’s mine was not located on forestland and was instead reclassified as being located on ‘revenue land’. Consequently, it did not need the statutory forest clearance. Pathak’s mining plans had been put back on track.

Business Standard reviewed documents showing how Chouhan reversed his decision to aid his political opponent-turned-minister. To do so, he also overruled the recommendations of the top forest official in charge of forestland records in the state.

Pathak, his mining firm Nirmala Minerals that runs the mine, and the chief minister’s office did not respond to detailed queries sent repeatedly on email since November 16. They also did not respond to repeated phone calls and text messages.

Forest or not?

Government-owned lands in India are classified either as ‘revenue lands’ or forestlands. These demarcations remain fuzzy in large parts of central India and have been made yet more complicated by a ruling that followed from a lack of legal definition of ‘forests’.

To mine from under a forest, a miner requires a statutory forest clearance under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. The clearances can take time and can be hard to come by if the forests growing on the piece of land are dense and rich in biodiversity or close to a protected wildlife area. Such clearances also undergo scrutiny by a Supreme Court-appointed expert panel called the Central Empowered Committee.

Under the Constitution, state governments are in charge of land classification. The greyness in land records consequently provides state governments critical leverage over projects that might fall in forested patches. Pathak’s case is instructive.

He is one of the several politicians with mining interests in the state. Realigning his political loyalties has paid off. His wealth grew from Rs 1.4 billion in 2013 to Rs 2.3 billion in 2018, show his declarations before the

Pathak’s Nirmala Minerals got the lease to mine the 53-ha land in Sehora Tehsil of Jabalpur in 1987. But the forest department prevented mining on it, citing the state forest department’s land management plans that treated the mining area as forestland.

Pathak first got relief in 2003 when Digvijay Singh, the then chief minister of the state, declared the land assigned to Nirmala Minerals for mining as “revenue” land and not forest. His government argued that the management plans treating the mine as forests were preliminary in nature and had never been finalised.

The Nirmala Minerals case along with other similar ones came under in 2005-06. The apex court’s Central Empowered Committee (CEC), recommended in 2010 that the land parcels under these management plans should be treated as forestlands.

Following up on the CEC’s recommendation, in 2011, with Chouhan now in the saddle as chief minister, Madhya Pradesh’s government constituted a committee of two senior forest officials and the district collector of Jabalpur to re-examine whether Nirmala Minerals’ leases fell in forestlands or not. Pathak was still a Congress MLA.

The committee recommended that “on the basis of the government’s forest and revenue records, the land allotted to the Nirmala Minerals should be considered to be reserve forest.” The state law department agreed with the recommendation.

But the final decision was left to chief minister Chouhan. Writing a three-page detailed note explaining his decision, Chouhan ordered in November 2011: “Considering the facts of the matter, I agree with the conclusion of the committee and the recommendation of the law department...I quash the order dated June 24, 2003 of the then chief minister in retrospect. Orders to be issued to declare the said land as reserve forest.”

Pathak would now need the nod of the Union environment and forest ministry to mine. For this, he would require the state government to recommend his case to the Centre.



Nirmala Minerals challenged the decision in the Jabalpur High Court in 2011. But the Chouhan government stood its ground telling courts that the mine plot was on forestland.

In 2015, the Jabalpur High Court ordered the government to form a “review committee” to re-examine the matter. Nirmala Minerals pleaded that the “competent authority” and not a review committee examine the case. The High Court agreed. By then Pathak had joined BJP.

The U-turn

The Chouhan government then appointed a district revenue official, and not a forest official, as the “competent authority” to decide the status of the land, which till that point was “reserve forest.” This revenue official of the state government now recommended that the mine be declared revenue land. The recommendation was opposed by the top forest official in charge of the forestland records in the state. But the forest secretary and the forest minister overruled the opinion of the official and presented options and background details in favour of the mining company, leaving the decision to chief minister Chouhan.

“Both the times in the past, the final decision with regard to the said land was taken at the level of the honourable chief minister. Hence, for the final decision to declare the above lands as revenue land, it would be appropriate to send the file again to the honourable chief minister,” said the forest secretary in the file notings.

The forest secretary also flagged that the state government is required to take permission from the before a “forest settlement officer” de-notifies a forest to non-forest land. But, he said, if the denotification order is passed by “settlement officer” under the “land revenue code” then “possibly” the court’s permission would not be required – a route that the state government had already taken to bypass the Supreme Court.

In June 2016 the state forest minister agreed with the proposal and on October 1, 2016 chief minister Chouhan approved the final order stating that Pathak’s mine fell on revenue land and not forestland. A complete U-turn had been made.

Pathak is now BJP’s candidate for the upcoming assembly elections from the Vijayraghavgarh constituency.

