The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) has formally advised the Supreme Court to reinstate the original boundaries of the Ecologically Sensitive Zone (ESZ) surrounding Bengaluru's Bannerghatta National Park (BNP). The recommendation, submitted on Wednesday, January 7, calls for a rollback of a 2020 government notification that significantly shrank the protected buffer area.
The Core of the Bannerghatta ESZ Dispute
The conflict traces back to 2016, when the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) proposed a draft notification fixing the ESZ at 268.9 square kilometres. This draft lapsed after the state government, then led by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, failed to submit its views.
Subsequently, in October 2018, the Ministry issued a revised draft that slashed the ESZ area to 168.68 sq km. This reduction followed a letter from then BJP Rajya Sabha MP Rajeev Chandrasekhar to then Environment Minister Dr Harsh Vardhan, flagging issues like illegal mining and quarrying that were exacerbating human-animal conflict. Chandrasekhar had urged for a team to be sent to examine the ESZ situation.
Environmentalist Vijay Nishanth highlighted the pressures on the zone, stating, "One problem was the mining in eco-sensitive areas... Real estate mafias were also pressuring to get in as Bengaluru was growing. People find it hard to believe that there are elephant populations living just 20 km from the city."
The Centre finalised the reduced ESZ size of 168.64 sq km in 2020 during the chief ministership of BS Yediyurappa. The matter was later brought before the CEC through an application by Bengaluru resident Kiran Urs in 2023, who argued that industrial and real estate interests were degrading the ESZ area.
Key Recommendations from the CEC's Exhaustive Report
Following a detailed site visit and an analysis spanning over five hundred pages, the CEC, chaired by Siddhanta Das, has put forth several critical conditions. The committee's report, submitted in response to an interlocutory application filed by activist K B Belliappa and others in 2025, is unequivocal in its findings.
The CEC has recommended the withdrawal of the 2020 ESZ notification. It argues that the reduced boundary "excludes scientifically identified elephant corridors and ecologically important patches" integral to the BNP landscape.
Instead, the report advocates for restoring the original 2016 notification. It does, however, allow for potential alterations, but only in cases of "dense, irreversible urban developments." Any such modifications must not impact wildlife corridors or the buffer functionality of the ESZ and must safeguard ecologically significant areas. Crucially, any change would require detailed justification from an expert committee and must not set a precedent.
Focus on Elephant Corridors and Community Assurance
The CEC report placed special emphasis on the vital elephant corridors in the region. It noted that near several villages in BNP's southern part, the ESZ width was a mere 100 metres, correlating with a rise in human-animal conflict incidents. This area is part of the movement path for elephants travelling between Cauvery National Park and BNP. Consequently, the committee recommended a reconsideration of the buffer width and delineation here.
Furthermore, the CEC advised the State Government to clearly communicate to the public that the purpose of the ESZ is "not intended to hamper the day-to-day activities or legitimate livelihoods of local communities." The zones are meant to protect precious forests and Protected Areas from adverse and irreversible impacts, balancing ecological conservation with community needs.
The Supreme Court's decision on these recommendations will be pivotal for the future of Bannerghatta National Park's ecosystem, which acts as a critical green lung and wildlife refuge on the outskirts of India's tech capital.
