Syllabus: Mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections.
Context
- Chhattisgarh High Court upheld cancellation of Community Forest Rights (CFRs) of Ghatbarra village in the Hasdeo Arand forests.
- Judgment ended a nine-year legal struggle while mining continued and large-scale deforestation occurred.
Background of the Conflict
- Ghatbarra Adivasis lost customary forests to the Parsa East–Kanta Basan coal mine.
- For Adivasis, forests represent a living relationship, not mere property.
History of Legal Tussles
- 2011: Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) rejected diversion citing ecological richness and unsettled forest rights.
- 2012: Environment Minister overruled objections and granted clearance despite villagers’ protests.
- 2014: NGT set aside the clearance, ordering reconsideration and halting mining.
- Supreme Court later allowed mining to resume while review continued.
- 2018: FAC reconsidered but treated operational mining as a fait accompli.
- 2013: Ghatbarra’s CFRs were formally recognised under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006.
- 2016: District Level Committee (DLC) unilaterally revoked CFRs, triggering litigation.
High Court Findings & Critique
- Court held CFRs void ab initio, arguing land had already been diverted.
- Contradicts Section 4(7) FRA, which mandates rights be recognised “free of all encumbrances.”
- Recognition does not block mining; Gram Sabha consent remains required for diversion.
- Court suggested monetary compensation, undermining community autonomy.
- Relied on procedural technicalities to avoid assessing FRA compliance in forest clearance.
- Ignored evidence of recorded Gram Sabha opposition and possible forged consents in nearby blocks.
- Questioned villagers’ locus standi despite CFRs belonging to the entire Gram Sabha.
Broader Implications
- Verdict reflects systemic dispossession of Adivasis despite statutory protections.
- Contradicts the spirit of the Niyamgiri judgment (2013) affirming Adivasi self-determination.
- Shows how legality can be deployed to legitimise extractive projects while bypassing FRA enforcement.
Q- Examine how the Forest Rights Act, 2006 seeks to empower forest-dependent communities and the challenges in its implementation. (15 Marks)