Bannerghatta National Park ESZ Dispute

The Central Empowered Committee has recommended that the Ecologically Sensitive Zone around Bengaluru’s Bannerghatta National Park be restored to its 2016 extent. The move comes after the zone was reduced in a 2020 notification. The issue has raised concerns over elephant corridors, human-wildlife conflict, mining, quarrying, and urban expansion near one of Karnataka’s key protected landscapes.

Background of the ESZ dispute

In 2016, a draft notification proposed an ESZ of 268.9 sq km around Bannerghatta National Park. That notification later lapsed. In 2018, a fresh draft reduced the ESZ to 168.68 sq km. The final 2020 notification fixed the area at 168.64 sq km. The reduction became controversial because it excluded several ecologically important stretches.

Concerns over wildlife and land use

The dispute has centred on:

• Illegal mining and quarrying near sensitive forest areas.
• Pressure from real estate expansion around Bengaluru.
• Disruption of elephant movement corridors.
• Rising human-animal conflict in villages near the park.

Bannerghatta lies within a wider elephant movement landscape, including routes linked to Cauvery National Park. The committee noted that some village stretches had only a 100-metre ESZ width, which was inadequate for ecological protection.

CEC recommendations to the Supreme Court

The CEC has recommended withdrawal of the 2020 ESZ notification. It has suggested restoring the 2016 boundary, with changes allowed only in cases of dense, irreversible urban development. Even then, such changes should not affect wildlife corridors, buffer functions, or ecologically patches. Any alteration must be backed by a detailed expert justification and should not set a precedent.

Implications for conservation policy

The report also stressed that ESZs are not meant to block legitimate local livelihoods. Their purpose is to protect forests and protected areas from adverse and irreversible impacts. The case marks the tension between urban growth and ecological safeguards, especially in rapidly expanding metropolitan regions.