Forest Act 2006 CASE STUDY (2), Slides of Land Law

Download Forest Act 2006 CASE STUDY (2) and more Slides Land Law in PDF only on Docsity!

DR.ARVIND NATH TRIPATHI LAW FACULTY,DSNLU

Implementation of the Forest Right

Act, 2006 in Chhattisgarh

A Case Study of Rawas and Banspattar Gram Panchayat, Kanker Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies, New Delhi

Implementation of the Forest Right Act,

2006 in Chhattisgarh

• The Chhattisgarh government received highest number of Individual Forest Right (IFR) claims, which accounts to more than 8. 56 lakh. Out of which the state government accepte 3. 98 lakh claims and rejected more than 4. 62 lakh claims. While the state has received highest number of claims, it also rejected highest number of claims ever since this law came to force. According to the available data, it has rejected more than 52 % of forest right claims filed by tribal and other traditional forest dwellers.

Implementation of the Forest Right Act, 2006 in Chhattisgarh

• Of the total claims filed by individuals in

Chhattisgarh, the government claims that it

has distributed 3. 98 lakh titles which

accounts for nearly 3. 38 lakh hectare of

forestland. On an average, each tribal family

got nearly 0. 85 hectare of land for individual

and common occupation and habitation.

However, the sub section 6 under section 4 of

the FRA law grants maximum of 4 hectare land

to each claimant.

Chhattisgarh

• Gram Panchayat Rawas and Banspattar
• Rawas and Banspattar are two Gram Panchayat located nearly 30 to 37 km southeast from Kanker city in southern part of the Chhattisgarh. Kanker district is part of Bastar region, which still has very thick forest cover. Both of these Panchayats are surrounded by healthy mix forest consist of trees like Sal, Sagaun, Tendu, Mahua, Aam and Kusum. Five villages (Banspattar, Mandabharri, Parredora, Rawas and Aamapani) of these two randomly selected Panchayats has total population of 2668. Out of this, nearly 63 % are Gond tribal.

Chhattisgarh

• A large part of non-tribal population in these

villages belongs to OBC community. The land

cultivated by tribal is largely un-recorded ,

however, most of land belonging to OBCs is

recorded in the revenue record of the state

government. However, the land holding of the

both communities (OBCs and STs) is very less

and therefore, both of these communities are

heavily depended on forest produces.

Chhattisgarh

• Villagers do not have formal control over

their local forest but they have been

collecting these produces for generations.

Tribal have rich cultural practices, strong

system of traditional medicine and rich

traditional ecological knowledge based on

their local forest. The trade of forest produce

in Chhattisgarh is very large and substantially

contributes to the gross domestic production

of the state.

Chhattisgarh

• The dependency of local people on agriculture is relatively less, and therefore the land holding is also very less. The entire regions in rain fed, so for most of these people it gives them one crop in a year. Despite these odds, people grow paddy and some lentils for their own consumption. Unlike in typical villages, these villages have no clear boundary, which can separate helmets, agricultural land and forest. Everything overlaps here. In nonagricultural season (such as winter) to differentiate between forestland and agriculture land is little difficult, as people tried to cultivate some favourable patches of forestland without disturbing forest and ecosystem.

Chhattisgarh

• Implementation of Forest Right Act in Rawas and Banspattar
• Individual Forest Rights Individual Forest Rights (IFR) under the Forest Rights Act empowers tribal and forest dwellers to claim over piece of land which a family was occupying for occupation or habitation. The clause (a) of subsection ( 1 ) under section 3 of the Act recognizes rights of tribal and other forest dwellers to “hold and live in the forest land under the individual or common occupation for habitation or for self cultivation for livelihood”. The rules under the law came to force in 2008 to address all procedural issues.

Chhattisgarh

• IFR Claims:
• In 2008 with the help of a local voluntary organization namely Parivartan Samaj Sevi Sanstha, people filed their claim in their respective Panchayat through Forest Right Committee constituted as per the law. Almost every tribal family from these five villages applied for land title. The Panchayat of Rawas and Banspattar claims that they have forwarded all application to Sub District Level Committee (SDLC) for their scrutiny and approval. According to villagers, most of villagers did not get their land title even after more than 10 years after they filed the claim in their respective Gram Panchayats. According information on IFR title distribution published by the state government, as of now, only 38 families in these villages were awarded with land title under the law.

Chhattisgarh

• The rule no. 6 (b) of the FRA rule, 2012 holds SDLC responsible for providing forest and revenue map of village forest and electoral rolls to the Gram Sabha. However, it is found that map of claimed land is not attached with any claim form in these five villages. In the case of Rawas village, few people in 2017 followed their claim through an online grievance redressal system of Chhattisgarh (Jandarshan). In response to this the Sub-division magistrate of Kanker informed to the villagers that their IFR claim applications submitted in April/May 2008 are pending in SDLC as applications do not have required revenue/forest map of the claimed land.

Chhattisgarh

• Role of Forest Department:
• People in Mandbhari village, claim that they have been cultivating land even before enactment of the Forest Rights Act. After its enactment in 2008 , the section 4 ( 3 ) of the Act not only allows them to continue cultivation but also recognizes them rightful cultivator of their land. Accordingly these villagers also filed their claim for IFR in 2008 and its is been pending in SDLC since then. In 2015 the forest department booked 17 families of Mandbhari village for illegally cultivating forest land. Vulnerable these 17 Gond families fought legal battle in the court. Interestingly the forest department could not prove that these families were illegally cultivating forestland. The court has already acquitted five out of 17 families booked by the forest department in November 2018.

Chhattisgarh

• Key Suggestions:
• • Villagers need hand holding support to dialogue with SDLC on their IFR and CFR claims. They also need help to access relevant evidence in support of their claims such as settlement records, satellite images, maps and others.
• • The SDLC is inactive and lower level officials are reluctant which has delayed recognition of IFR claims for more than 10 years. The head of department of tribal development in Raipur may direct to SDLC to decide on all claims in next few months (whatever trime frame reasonable for the government)

Chhattisgarh

• • The CFR is crucial for tribal in this region;

however, as happened in other district, the

SDLC may reject their major rights over forest

produce in the absence of evidence and

unclear/incomplete claim form submitted by

villagers. These claims need to be reviewed

and hand holding by expert can be provided

them to strengthen their claim.