Karnataka Forest Department Requests HMT to Transfer Over 430 Acres of Peenya Plantation and Jarakabande Sandal Reserve

In a move that’s turning heads across Bengaluru, the Karnataka forest department has officially written to Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd (HMT), urging the company to cede about 430 acres and an additional 21 guntas of land nestled within the Peenya industrial belt and the adjoining Jarakabande sandalwood reserve.

It’s not just a bureaucratic note; the request comes on the back of a series of court rulings that have, over the past few years, nudged the state’s forest officials to reassess how much private industry can actually occupy on what was historically designated as forest land. The courts have, in several judgments, underscored the need to restore forest cover and protect the ecological balance – especially in regions where sandalwood, a prized species, still thrives.

HMT, a veteran of the manufacturing sector, has long held the Peenya tract as part of its sprawling campus. The company argues that the land is integral to its production lines, research labs and employee amenities. Yet, the forest department’s stance is clear: the parcel in question overlaps with the Jarakabande reserve, an area earmarked for sandalwood cultivation and wildlife habitat.

Officials from the forest department say the handover isn’t about penalising HMT; rather, it’s about correcting a historical oversight. “When the land was originally allotted, certain sections were inadvertently classified as industrial, ignoring the underlying forest rights,” said a senior forest officer, who asked to remain unnamed. “We are simply asking the company to honor the original intent of those lands – to serve the environment and the community.”

The request has stirred mixed reactions. Environmental groups have welcomed the move, lauding it as a step toward restoring a sizable green buffer that could mitigate Bengaluru’s ever‑growing air‑quality woes. On the other hand, some industry watchers warn that such land transfers could set a precedent, potentially unsettling other corporations that occupy lands with ambiguous titles.

Legal experts note that the matter is far from settled. While the forest department can issue a directive, actual transfer would likely hinge on further court proceedings, negotiations over compensation, and perhaps a re‑evaluation of the land’s valuation. HMT, for its part, has expressed a willingness to discuss the issue, but stresses that any handover must be “fair, transparent and in line with due process.”

As the dialogue unfolds, the broader question remains: how does a rapidly urbanising state like Karnataka balance industrial growth with the urgent need to preserve its natural heritage? The Peenya‑Jarakabande episode may well become a touchstone for future debates on land use, environmental stewardship, and the rights of both the forest and the factory.