Key Takeaways:
- Central Empowered Committee member to visit Bannerghatta National Park on 2 January 2026 to examine claims about the Bannerghatta Eco-Sensitive Zone.
- Petitioners say the 2018 reduction of the ESZ created unprotected enclaves, some within elephant corridors, exposing land to mining and large developments.
- Activists and locals allege the buffer cutback legalised ecological violations and heightens human‑animal conflict risks.
A member of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), appointed by the Supreme Court, is scheduled to visit Bannerghatta National Park (BNP) on 2 January 2026 after a petition challenged the reduction of the park’s Eco‑Sensitive Zone (ESZ).
Bannerghatta Eco-Sensitive Zone
Chandra Prakash Goyal, the CEC member who will lead the inspection, is expected to meet government officials and assess claims in a petition filed by K. Belliappa and others in May 2025. The petitioners contend that the 2018 notification which reduced the BNP ESZ from 268.9 sq km to 168.84 sq km excluded ecologically critical areas and created unprotected enclaves within the forested landscape.
According to the petition, the buffer width around the park was cut from as much as 4.5 km in places to between 1 km and 0.1 km, a change that activists argue fails to account for site‑specific ecological needs. They say the decision has fractured contiguity of the forest and left several patches vulnerable to mining, construction and other commercial activity.
“One of the enclaves shows the presence of a quarry. The reduction has been a way to legalise ecological violations,” said Kiran Urs of the Bannerghatta Nature Conservation Trust. Activists emphasise that five of the unprotected enclaves fall within established elephant corridors, raising fresh concerns about habitat fragmentation and increased human‑wildlife conflict.
Local residents and farmers share those worries. Shivakumar, a farmer from the region, said efforts to acquire land in the area began before the 2018 notification. “Since 2016, efforts have been on to acquire vast swathes of land in the region. Almost all the gomalas in the region have vanished by now,” he added.
Beyond the immediate issue of enclaves, petitioners point to several major infrastructure plans that they say amplify the risk to the park’s biodiversity. These include a National Highways Authority of India proposal for a six‑lane elevated flyover as part of the Satellite Town Ring Road, which would run for 3.85 km across BNP and its buffer, and proposals for an airport near the Bannerghatta‑Kanakpura belt. Activists also allege plans for 2,000‑acre layouts in areas that are no longer protected following the ESZ revision.
The upcoming site visit by the CEC will be an opportunity to inspect these tangible changes on the ground and to review whether the 2018 notification adequately reflected ecological and wildlife movement requirements. The committee’s findings could prompt recommendations to the Supreme Court or to the central and state governments on restoring or reconfiguring protection measures.
Environmental lawyers and conservationists note that ESZ notifications are meant to act as buffer zones, regulating activities that are incompatible with conservation objectives. Any erosion of these safeguards, they argue, risks long‑term damage to wildlife habitat and landscape connectivity and can increase the incidence of human‑animal encounters.
The CEC’s inspection does not mark the end of legal contestation. The petitioners will be watching for a detailed report and for follow‑up action from authorities. For residents and conservation groups, the immediate priority is clarity on land use permissions in the enclaves and assurance that critical corridors, particularly those used by elephants, receive adequate protection.
The CEC visit on 2 January is expected to include field assessments and consultations with local stakeholders. Any subsequent recommendations will feed into ongoing judicial and administrative processes concerning the park’s ESZ and the protection of its fragile ecosystems.
