Rajaji's eco-sensitive zone is not finalised on the record, and the record that says so is a chain of Supreme Court orders rather than a press release. As of 3 November 2026 that chain shows the State of Uttarakhand asked through 2025 to move the proposal forward, a Ministry index that still lists only a 2018 draft for this park, and a judgment of 17 November 2025 that fixes a date against which every tiger reserve in the country will be measured. This page sets the chain out in order, quotes the operative words, and keeps draft stage, proposal stage and notified stage apart.
Sources checked on 3 November 2026: the Supreme Court's orders of 20 February 2025, 19 March 2025 and 8 October 2025; the judgment of 17 November 2025 in In Re: Corbett, 2025 INSC 1325; and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change's eco-sensitive zone notifications index together with the 2018 draft text for Rajaji.
20 February 2025: "have not yet been finalized"
In Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995, the order of 20 February 2025 records the position in the court's own words: the eco-sensitive zones for Rajaji National Park and Jim Corbett National Park "have not yet been finalized by the State of Uttarakhand". The order gives the State two weeks to complete the formalities and directs a report on 05.03.2025. Those two sentences are the clearest statement in the chain about who held the file at that moment: the State, with a court-imposed clock running.
19 March 2025: a revised proposal and two affidavits
The order of 19 March 2025 records that a revised proposal was forwarded to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on 11.03.2025, and that the State of Uttarakhand filed two affidavits — one for Rajaji and one for Corbett. The order prints both affidavits undated. No date is therefore attached to either filing anywhere on this page, and none is inferred from the surrounding text: where the record is silent, this page stays silent with it. What the order does show is the shape of the file — two parks, two affidavits, one proposal sent to the central ministry.
8 October 2025: time to issue a final draft
The order of 8 October 2025 gave the State time till 10.11.2025 for issuing a final draft eco-sensitive zone notification and listed the matter on 11.11.2025. Read plainly, that is the court still steering a proposal that has not reached notification: the target being discussed is a draft notification, which is a proposal for public comment, not a notified zone. No compliance report, extension order or later direction in that sequence dated in 2026 was located as of 3 November 2026, so nothing is reported here about what happened at, or after, the November listing.
17 November 2025: a direction with a date attached
The judgment of 17 November 2025 in In Re: Corbett, 2025 INSC 1325, goes further than case management. At paragraph 47.1.3 all State Governments are directed to notify eco-sensitive zones around all Tiger Reserves, including buffer and fringe areas, "no later than 1 year from the date of this judgment". The judgment does not print a calendar date; one year from 17 November 2025 is 17 November 2026, and that computation is done here and labelled as a computation. On 3 November 2026 the deadline was therefore imminent, not expired — fourteen days away. This page alleges no expiry, no breach and no disregard of that direction, because the period was still running when the sources were checked.
What the Ministry's index shows, checked 3 November 2026
The Ministry's own eco-sensitive zone notifications index is the second half of the evidence, and the evidence there is an absence. The Uttarakhand entry, numbered 387, shows only the draft S.O. 2031(E) [22.05.2018] for Rajaji National Park: no final notification follows it, and no re-notification of any later date appears in the section. The Uttarakhand section carries no eco-sensitive zone entry for Jim Corbett at all. The draft text itself is the 2018 document that the court's 2025 orders are, in effect, asking the State to move past.
The careful reading is evidence of absence rather than decision: a missing listing shows that no final notification was published there as of the date checked, not that the Ministry considered the proposal and turned it down. This page therefore never says the Ministry refused or rejected anything — only that no final or re-notification for Rajaji, and no Corbett entry, appeared in the Uttarakhand section on 3 November 2026.
Two footprints that do not match
A structural point sits under the whole chain. The 2018 draft is a draft for Rajaji National Park. The direction of 17 November 2025 reaches eco-sensitive zones around all Tiger Reserves, including buffer and fringe areas — a tiger reserve is a larger legal object than its national park, because it carries a core and a buffer beyond the park boundary. The two are therefore not the same footprint, and clearing one does not clear the other. Even a final notification confined to the park would leave the buffer and fringe components of the direction unaddressed, so the 2018 draft alone does not satisfy the judgment of 17 November 2025. This is a reading of two documents' own scopes, not a finding of non-compliance.
What this page will not say
Five abstentions. No order of 5 March 2025 is quoted or relied on, because its primary text was not located as of 3 November 2026 — the 20 February order's direction for a report on that date is what is reported. No expiry, breach or defiance of any deadline is alleged: the 17 November 2026 date computed above had not arrived when the sources were checked. No 2026 compliance order or extension is described, because none was located. No present extent, radius or restriction of any eco-sensitive zone is given, because no final notified text exists in the sources used here. And no legal advice is offered: this is a reading of orders and an index, with dates attached.
Three neighbouring matters, kept separate
Two other stories on this site touch the same phrase — "eco-sensitive zone" — and must not be merged into this one. The stone crusher record is about individual units, distances measured from park or buffer boundaries and clearance questions before courts and the National Green Tribunal; the riverbed mining page is about proposals considered by the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife. Both argue about what is allowed inside a zone; neither tells us whether the zone has been notified, and their facts are not repeated here.
The Laldhang-Chillarkhal road order is separate again: a permission with conditions about works on an existing road in the buffer landscape, decided on its own facts. A road order in the buffer is not an eco-sensitive zone notification, and keeping the three apart lets each page state precisely what its own document says.
Where to read next
For the boundary figures of the park and the reserve — 820.42, 819.54 and 1,075.17 km² — the legal boundary figures page works from the notifications themselves. For the rest of this site's wildlife record, the animals list and the wildlife guide cover the fauna, while the habitats and flora guide describes the forest and grassland the zone would cover. The two companion pages in this release are the 1995 reptile and amphibian record and the termites, centipedes, wasps and scorpions record. Sources checked 3 November 2026.
Rajaji's eco-sensitive zone: questions answered
Is Rajaji's eco-sensitive zone finalized?
Not on the record located for this page, which was checked on 3 November 2026. The Supreme Court's order of 20 February 2025 in W.P.(C) 202/1995 records that the eco-sensitive zones for Rajaji National Park and Jim Corbett National Park "have not yet been finalized by the State of Uttarakhand", gives the State two weeks to complete the formalities and directs a report on 05.03.2025: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/28330482/
What did the order of 19 March 2025 record?
That a revised proposal had been forwarded to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on 11.03.2025, and that the State of Uttarakhand had filed two affidavits — one for Rajaji and one for Corbett. Both affidavits are printed undated in that order, so this page gives them no dates: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/42963790/
What did the order of 8 October 2025 do?
It gave the State time till 10.11.2025 for issuing a final draft eco-sensitive zone notification and listed the matter on 11.11.2025. The proposal was still at draft stage at that point, and nothing located for this page shows a final notification issued for Rajaji afterwards: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/167644408/
What does the 17 November 2025 judgment require, and by when?
In Re: Corbett, 2025 INSC 1325, paragraph 47.1.3, directs all State Governments to notify eco-sensitive zones around all Tiger Reserves, including buffer and fringe areas, "no later than 1 year from the date of this judgment" — which is 17 November 2026, a date computed here rather than printed. On 3 November 2026 that deadline was imminent and not expired: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/153216651/
What does the Ministry's own index show for Uttarakhand?
Checked on 3 November 2026, the eco-sensitive zone notifications index carries Uttarakhand entry 387 showing only the draft S.O. 2031(E) [22.05.2018] for Rajaji National Park, with no final notification and no re-notification after it, and no Corbett eco-sensitive zone entry in the Uttarakhand section: https://moef.gov.in/esz-notifications — draft text at https://moef.gov.in/uploads/2019/10/rajaji-1.pdf. The absence of a listing is the evidence used here; it is not read as a refusal by the Ministry.