Judicial Setback to Adivasi Community Forest Rights in Hasdeo Arand

Context:

• The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the cancellation of Community Forest Rights (CFRs) of Ghatbarra village in the Hasdeo Arand forest region, paving the way for coal mining.

• The verdict has sparked concerns over erosion of Adivasi rights, dilution of the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, and weakening of environmental governance.

Key Highlights:

Case Facts / Judicial Decision

• The High Court upheld the revocation of CFRs granted in 2013 to Ghatbarra village.

• The forest land was diverted for the Parsa East and Kanta Basan coal mine.

• The Court termed the original recognition of CFRs a “mistake” and suggested monetary compensation instead of restoration of rights.

• The ruling primarily affects Adivasi communities dependent on forests for livelihood, culture, and identity.

Chronology of Events

• 2011:

  • The Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) rejected the mining proposal citing:

    • Rich biodiversity

    • Unsettled forest rights

• 2012:

  • Forest clearance granted despite local opposition.

• 2013:

  • Gram Sabha of Ghatbarra formally granted CFRs under the FRA, 2006.

• 2014:

  • National Green Tribunal (NGT) set aside the forest clearance.

• Later:

  • Supreme Court allowed mining to resume.

• 2016:

  • District Level Committee (DLC) cancelled CFRs.

• 2025:

  • High Court upheld the cancellation, validating mining operations.

Legal and Constitutional Concerns

• The judgment ignored Section 4(7) of the FRA, which mandates:

  • Forest rights must be recognised “free of all encumbrances”.

• The Court avoided examining whether:

  • Forest clearance complied with legal requirements

  • Informed consent of Gram Sabha was obtained, as mandated by law

• The decision contradicts the Supreme Court’s Niyamgiri verdict (2013), which upheld:

  • Adivasi self-determination

  • Gram Sabha’s authority over customary forest resources

Environmental and Social Implications

• Hasdeo Arand is one of Central India’s largest contiguous forest landscapes, rich in:

  • Biodiversity

  • Carbon sinks

• Mining threatens:

  • Forest ecology

  • Livelihood security of Adivasi communities

  • Cultural and spiritual ties with land

• Monetary compensation undermines the collective and non-economic value of forest rights.

Significance / Concerns

• Sets a dangerous precedent for dilution of legally recognised forest rights.

• Weakens rights-based environmental governance.

• Risks converting FRA from a protective law into a procedural formality.

• Raises questions on:

  • Judicial interpretation of welfare legislation

  • Balance between development and indigenous rights

UPSC Relevance (GS-wise):

GS 2 – Polity

• Role of judiciary in protecting constitutional and statutory rights

• Federal governance and Centre–State dynamics in forest administration

• Interpretation of welfare legislation

GS 2 – Social Justice

• Adivasi rights and self-governance

• Community consent and participatory democracy

• Development-induced displacement

GS 3 – Environment & Ecology

• Forest conservation vs extractive development

• Environmental clearance processes

• Sustainable development challenges

Prelims Focus:

• Forest Rights Act, 2006

• Community Forest Rights (CFR)

• Role of Gram Sabha

• Forest Advisory Committee (FAC)

Mains Orientation:

• Critically examine the impact of judicial decisions on Adivasi self-determination and forest governance.

• Discuss whether economic compensation can substitute community forest rights.