Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve: Madras High Court Orders 87 Resorts Shut

The Madras High Court on 4 November ordered the immediate closure of 87 resorts operating inside Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve in Erode district and told authorities to take steps to demolish them. A bench of Justice N Sathish Kumar and Justice GK Muthukumar passed the order while hearing a long-running petition on illegal buildings in the reserve, after a status report from the Erode District Collector said none of the 87 had the required approvals, LiveLaw reported.

Seals on Resorts Without Licences

The bench said “action has to be taken to immediately close down all the illegal buildings”. Authorities were directed to identify resorts running without valid licences or permission and to lock and seal them in accordance with law. Guests and staff at the 87 properties will have to leave once the order is carried out; the report did not give a date by which the sealing must be finished.

No Planning Permission, No Hill Authority Nod

The Collector’s report said none of the 87 establishments had planning permission or building approval from the Directorate of Town and Country Planning. It also found no record of permission from the Hill Area Conservation Authority for converting land from residential to commercial use. The court noted that two resorts had obtained interim orders against closure from another bench without telling it that related matters were pending before this bench. It said they had not come to court with clean hands, and directed the Registry to place both petitions before this bench so that orders do not conflict.

Also read UAPA Bail: Foreign Nationality Alone Is No Bar, Supreme Court Rules

Three Years After the First Notice

The case is Dr R Karpagam v The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden (WP 13711 of 2022). The Madras High Court first issued notice to the Tamil Nadu government on illegal resorts in the reserve in 2022. In October 2025, a Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava asked the Erode administration and the Forest Department to act against resorts and lodges in prohibited zones and file a compliance report within four weeks. In that hearing, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the resorts lacked National Board for Wildlife approval under Section 33 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The reserve, notified as a tiger reserve in 2013, covers about 1,408 sq km.

Next Steps Not Yet Public

The next hearing date and a deadline for demolition were not available in the report seen by IPB. The order of the court will show how much time the district administration has been given. For more court and governance stories, see Daily Updates; earlier wildlife coverage includes the Madhya Pradesh cheetah death probe.

Source: Based on reporting by LiveLaw. Background from DT Next.

Image: DT Next (file photo).