Relevance (UPSC GS-III: Environment & Biodiversity; GS-II: Rights of Indigenous Communities and Governance)

What happened

A recent Chhattisgarh High Court order dismissed a challenge by villagers from Ghatbarra in the Hasdeo Aranya forest against the cancellation of their Community Forest Rights. Activist groups say the ruling weakens the Forest Rights Act and clears the path for continued mining in a sensitive landscape. The court treated an earlier recognition of rights as wrongly granted and therefore invalid from the start, while mining permissions were upheld.

Why it matters

• Forest-dwelling communities rely on rights over minor forest produce, grazing, cultural access, and consent through Gram Sabha decisions.
• The order is seen by campaigners as a setback for recognition, due process, and free, prior and informed consent in one of central India’s richest forest belts.
• The case sits within wider moves to divert large tracts of Hasdeo forest for coal mining, which has triggered sustained community protests.
  

What the law says (simple note on the Forest Rights Act)

• The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006—the Forest Rights Act—gives individual and community rights over forest resources and empowers Gram Sabhas to initiate and verify claims.
• It requires Gram Sabha consent to be central in decisions that affect forests and livelihoods, and it allows Community Forest Resource titles over customary areas. Weak or delayed implementation has often led to disputes.
  

Key concerns raised by activists

• Cancellation of community titles without a transparent, participatory process.
• Overriding Gram Sabha authority while proceeding with project clearances.
• Ecological risk to an elephant-rich, high-biodiversity forest and to connected river systems.
  

What a balanced way forward could include

• Time-bound, open review of cancelled titles with the presence of Gram Sabha representatives and independent observers.
• On-ground social and ecological assessments before any diversion, made public in local languages.
• Restoration plans and livelihood guarantees if mining proceeds, with clear benefit-sharing and long-term monitoring.
  

Exam hook

Build your answer on three legs: legal protection under the Forest Rights Act → due process and Gram Sabha consent → ecological and livelihood stakes in Hasdeo, then propose transparent review and community-centred compliance.

UPSC Prelims question

With reference to the Forest Rights Act, which of the following is correct?

1. Gram Sabhas have a central role in initiating and verifying forest rights claims.
2. The Act provides for Community Forest Resource titles.
3. Consent of Gram Sabhas is irrelevant for diversion of forest land.

Select the correct answer:
(a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (a)

One-line wrap
Protecting forest rights is not anti-development—it is the foundation for lawful, fair, and sustainable decisions in forests like Hasdeo.