1

GAPS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION

OF FOREST RIGHTS ACT- 2006

SANJAY KUMAR SUMAN, I.F.S,

DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,

DUMKA FOREST DIVISION,

JHARKHAND.

Abstract-

The Scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers

(recognition of forest rights) Act, 2006 has been enacted by the Central

Govt to undo the “historical injustice” committed against the forest

dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers who have

been living in and around the forests for centuries. This is a new Act and

its implementation is initiated by the Gram Sabha and Forest Rights

Committee, mostly comprising of tribals, therfore some difficulties are

faced in the implementation of this Act in the field. Further, the

implementation of the Act in recognition of rights involves many

departments, such as revenue department, tribal welfare department &

forest department, so it becomes more difficult to have desired result in

time. There are some gaps at policy level too, making the implementation

even more difficult.

It is due to these gaps at policy and implementation levels that the

Central Govt. has to issue several guidelines for interpretation of the

provisions of the Act. Many of these guidelines and interpretations, have

not even reached at the implementing authorities level thereby creating

2

confusions at ground level. In view of these difficulties even the rules i.e.

Forest Dwelling (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2008 has been

amended in 2012 as Forest dwelling (Recognition of Forest Rights)

Amendment Rules, 2012.

In the light of the above, a study has been carried out to identify the

important gaps in the implementation of Forest Rights Act, 2006 based on

the field experience and the participation in different meetings attended at

various levels.

Key words-

Scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers, Forest

Rights Committee, Individual Forest Rights, Community

forest Rights, Community forest resource, Bona fide livelihood,

Primarily reside in.

Introduction-

A large number of people especially the scheduled tribes are living

in and around forests for a long period in symbiotic relationship. They are

partly or totally dependent on forest for their existence. In some areas they

had some kinds of rights which they are exercising for a very long period.

The Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers communities

living in and around forests in India have had a history of conserving and

using the forests resource sustainably, arising from their dependence on

the same. This relationship has led to formalized or informal customary

rules of use and extraction, often governed by ethical beliefs and practices

that have ensured that forests are not too degraded. They were completely

or partly dependent on the forest for their daily needs and thus they were

dependent on the forest for their existence. However, in modern era the

focus shifted from the forests being used as a resource base for sustenance

of local communities to a State resource for commercial interests and

development of land for agriculture. Several Acts and policies such as the

3

Indian Forest Act of 1865, 1894 and 1927 of Central Govt and some state

forest Acts curtailed centuries‐old, customary‐use rights of local

communities and consolidated the government's control over all forests.

The Post‐Independence forest policies and laws like the Forest Policy of

1952, Wild Life (Protection) Act of 1972, the Forest (Conservation) Act

of 1980, National Forest Policy 1988, further added to the problems of the

forest dependent tribals and their communities. Local uses were further

curtailed; thereby further alienating the Scheduled Tribes and other

traditional forest dwellers from their age‐old, symbiotic relationship with

forest. After independence the economic policies led to increase in

industries like mining and other development activities like construction

of various roads, dams, hydro electric projects, factories, establishment of

industries etc, caused large scale displacement. Consequently, over the

last couple of decades several people's movements have emerged against

the process of rights deprivation and marginalization of forest

communities. The PESA Act of 1996 was introduced to ensure some right

to tribal communities through decentralization of governance, with

bottom ‐top approach but it could not bring much justice to the tribals and

their communities.

In view of this situation the Central Govt. enacted the scheduled

tribes and other traditional forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights)

Act,2006 ,which came into force in 2008 through scheduled tribes and

other traditional forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights) rules 2008 to

give the rights of scheduled tribes and their communities. This Act

aspires to undo years of historic injustice to these scheduled tribes and

other traditional forest dwellers by recognizing and vesting the rights to

use, manage and conserve forest resources and to legally hold rights on

forest lands that they have been residing in and cultivating since long.

Apart from it, by recognizing community rights over forest resources, it

4

attempts to ensure livelihood and food security while empowering them to

use biodiversity sustainably and conserve it to maintain ecological

balance. These forest rights have been described in chapter II of forest

rights Act 2006 which reads as follow:-

3.(1) For the purpose of this Act, the following

rights, which secure individual or community tenure or both, shall be the

forest rights of forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional

forest dwellers on all forest lands namely:-

(a) rights to hold and live in the forest land under the individuals or

common occupation for habitation or for self-cultivation for livelihood by

a member or members of a forest dwelling Scheduled tribes or other

traditional forest dwellers.

(b) community rights such as nistar, by whatever name called, including

those used in erstwhile princely states, Zamindari or such intermediary

regimes;

(c) rights of ownership, access to collect, use, and dispose of minor forest

produce which has been traditionally collected within or outside village

boundaries;

(d) other community rights of user or entitlement such as fish and other

products of water bodies, grazing (both settled or transhumant) and

traditional seasonal resource access of nomadic or pastoralist

communities;

(e) rights including communities tenures of habitat and habitation for

primitive tribal groups and pre-agricultural communities;

(f) rights in or over disputed lands under any nomenclature in any states

where claims are disputed;

(g) rights for conversion of pattas or leaves or grants issued by any local

authority or any states Government on forest lands to titles;

5

(h) rights of settlement and conversion of all forest village, old habitation,

unsureyed villages and other villages in forest, whether recorded, notified

or not into revenue villages;

(i) right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community

forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and

conserving for sustainable use;

(j) rights which are recognised under any states law or laws of any

Autonomous District Council or Autonomous Regional Council or which

are accepted as rights of tribals under any traditional or customary law of

the concerned tribes of any states;

(k) right of access to biodiversity and community right to intellectual

property and traditional knowledge related to biodiversity and cultural

diversity;

(l) any other traditional rights customarily enjoyed by the forest dwelling

scheduled tribes or other traditional forest dwellers, as the case may be,

which are not mentioned in clauses (a) to (k) but excluding the traditional

rights of hunting or trapping or extracting a part of the body of any

species of wild animal;

(m) rights to in situ rehabilitation including alternative land in cases

where the scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers have been

illegally evicted or displaced from forest land of any description without

receiving their legal entitled to rehabilitation prior to the 13th day of

December, 2005.

These rights can be claimed both as individual and as a community.

In case of individual, the scheduled tribes who primarily reside in and

who depends on the forests or forest lands for bona fide livelihood needs

were given rights to hold and live in the forest land for self-cultivation for

livelihood.

6

These rights when claimed as a community are referred to as

community forest rights and were recognised such as nistar by Zamindari

or such intermediaries regimes rights of ownership i.e. access, use and

disposal of Non timber forest produce (NTFP), rights over the product of

water bodies and grazing grounds etc. The section 3(2) of the forest rights

Act, 2006 provides for diversion of forest land up to one hectare with

some conditions for thirteen type of facilities such as school, dispensary

etc. for common use.

The Act has particular significance in taking a historic step in

providing for community rights to “protect, regenerate, conserve and

manage” any community resource for sustainable use. The provisions of

section 3(1) I and section 5 of the Act together with Rule 4e give rights

and responsibility to the Gram sabha for sustainable use, conservation of

biodiversity & wildlife, ensuring that internal and external factors do not

destroy their community forests and maintenance of ecological balance.

The Community Forest Rights provisions are crucial for changing

the manner in which forest have been viewed and governed thus far.

These have a potential to change the top‐down centralized governance of

forests towards greater decentralization and site‐specificity, and for

providing collective livelihood security to communities. This, however is

a process which essentially faces a number of challenges. Certain systems,

processes support structures will thus need to be in place for these

provisions to realize their full potential. The Act gives community forest

Rights Act in :-

Sec 3(1) (i) provide the “right to protect, regenerate, conserve or

manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally

protecting and conserving for sustainable use’’.

Section 5 of Forest Rights Act, 2006 provides rights to the title

holders, gram sabhas and village level institutions to protect the wildlife,

7

forest and biodiversity and to access to community forest resources and to

manage and protect the same.

Rule 4e under the Act states that communities which claim rights

under the Act have a rights to “constitute committees for the protection of

wildlife, forest and biodiversity, from amongst its members, in order to

carry out the provisions of section 5 of the Act”.

It has been noticed that there has been an emphasis on

implementation of only a few provisions of the Act rather than the

whole Act in complete sense. The thrust of the implementation in

most parts of the country has been on claiming individual rights over

the forest lands while rights over community forest resource have

been largely ignored.

Over the last two years this lacuna has been recognized by many

government and non government agencies. However, the actual step of

communities claiming these rights is easier said than done. For a number

of reasons such claims are not being made across the country. It is very

difficult to get a national picture on status of Community Forest Resource

rights since little disaggregated data is available even with the Ministry of

Tribal Affairs for making proper assessments at State level. Even where

titles have been issued, there have been confusions and problems in some

areas regarding the conditions and restrictions mentioned in the titles.

Further the provision of chapter III of the Act regarding the

recognition, restoration and vesting of forest rights are also not

implemented in most of the parts of the country.

In the Act there are some duties of the holders of forest rights

described in chapter III(5) which reads as follow:- The holders of any

forest rights, Gram sabha and villages level institution in areas where

there are holders of any forest rights under this Act are empowered to-

(a) protect the wild life, forest and biodiversity;

8

(b) ensure that adjoining catchment areas, water sources and other

ecological sensitive areas are adequately protected;

(c) ensure that the habited of forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other

traditional forest dwellers is preserved from any form of destructive

practice affecting their cultural and natural heritage;

(d) ensure that the decision taken in the Gram Sabha to regulate access to

community forest resources and stop any activity which adversely

affects the wild animal, forest and the biodiversity are complied with;

The rights holders both as individual or community are not willing

to perform these duties in most of the areas. In majority of cases the

right holders are not even aware of the provisions of these duties given

to them by the Act.

Material and Methods

The area of study is the whole country especially the state of

Jharkhand. The study is qualitative in nature and most of the informations

have been gathered by attending various meetings at local, district & state

level and some reputed institutes. To identify the implementation level

implication data has been collected through indirect interviews from

various stakeholders such as

individuals, community, members of Sub divisional level committee and

District level committee. The secondary data has been collected to study

the existing policy level implication and the debate going over it through

various research reports, state level and district level consultation or

Community forest resource and Community forest resource learning

group. This study used a combination of different research approaches

and sources such as:-

(1) field visits and interviews

9

(2) Review of secondary sources like ministry of tribal affairs website,

joint ministry of tribal affairs-Ministry of environment and forest

committee report 2010, NAC.

(3) Recommendation report collection of regional information from

members of the CFRLAP.

Results and Discussion

The forest right Act 2006 provides immense possibilities for the

scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers both as individual

and as community to gain individual & community rights, to get their

livelihood along with the right to govern and manage their forest

resources. However, the practical efficiency of the legal framework of

rights depends largely on how the provision of the Act is perceived and

implemented in the field in different parts of the country.

The Tribal Department has been notified as the nodal department for

implementation of this Act. The provision of the Act has to be

implemented by these four main stages:-

1. Meeting of Gram Sabha and formation of forest rights committee.

2. Submission of claims to the Gram Sabha.

3. Verification of the claims.

4. Recognition of rights.

These stages has to be implemented in the field according

to the procedure given in the Forest rights Act, 2006 and Rules 2008. The

Act provides for three field level committees i.e. Forest rights committee

(FRC), Sub-divisional level committee (SDLC) and District level

committee (DLC) to ensure proper implementation of Act. The duties and

functions of the committee have been described in detail in the Act and

Rule.

10

Based on the field experience and informations gathered from

different levels in states a few important lacunae had been identified in each of

the four steps creating gaps in implementation of the forest Rights Act, 2006.

As per the Act, the states had to create four types of committee for the

implementation namely State level monitoring Committee (SLMC), District

level committee (DLC), Sub-divisional level committee and forest rights

committee (FRC). The first three committees could be formed rapidly with

administrative officers but, the last one, the Forest Rights Committee is actually

the key to the implementation of the Act, and has to be formed within the

community members.

The important gaps in implementation of Forest Rights Act are:-

1. A lot of ambiguity had been observed in the formation of Forest

Rights Committee. In many states the panchayat system is not very

strong and in some cases the panchayat elections are not held

regularly. In that case the Gram panchayats are not operational up

to the desired level necessary for implementation of the Act. The

target people are primarily tribal and the Gram panchayat

responsible for the formation of Forest Rights Committee

comprising of these people are not efficient enough to implement

the Act in letter and spirit.

2. The Gram Sabha/ Forest Rights Committee have to receive all types

of claims of rights and document it with proper receiving, but in

most of the states the Gram Sabha/ FRC do not have desired

infrastructure and technical know how to keep these records.

3. The main target group of this Act are mostly illiterate and therefore

filling and submission of forms regarding the claims becomes very

difficult. In this situation many middleman and some bad elements

starts operating with vested interest.

11

4. There is lack of awareness about Community Forest Resource

provisions among local communities as well as government

officials. The act provides right on thirteen different types of

community rights but only two or three rights are often seen to be

claimed and without proper corroboration, which often led to

rejection of claim.

5. Community Forest Resource claiming process is complex and

several evidences are often asked to be filled by officials. The

evidences are needed to be collected from Revenue Department and

forest department. In most cases information are not available for

public domain and need to be collected through Right To

Information Act. These procedures are difficult for the communities

to handle. Therefore most of the time the claims are found pending

because of lack of evidences.

6. As per the provision in Act it’s the responsibilities of the

government department to provide required documents to the

individual & communities as evidence but it is not taken up by the

concerned departments. The person seeking rights individual or

community have to struggle hard to get a piece of evidence.

7. In absence of authentic records of evidence in situation discussed

above the role of revenue and forest departments becomes very

important and the actual eligible people also have to face serious

problems in claiming rights for them.

8. The tribal department has been declared as the nodal department for

enactment of this Act, but the records for the forest lands are in

possession of either forest department or the revenue department. In

view of this situation it is really very difficult to have a good

liasioning between all three departments i.e. the tribal welfare

department, the revenue department and the forest department.

12

9. In most of the cases the meeting of Gram Sabha is not organised in

accordance with the requirements of the Act, again attracting the

role of the middle man or official of revenue or tribal welfare

department.

10. Receiving the claims and its verification needs involvement of the

Forest Rights Committee, the claimant, revenue official and forest

officials. The liasioning among all these stakeholders is an

extremely difficult task. In fact this is the most difficult activity as

far as the implementation of Forest Rights Act is concerned since

none of the above departments work together. One very importants

activity at this stage is the preparation of map for which technical

expertise is a must. Thus the verification of claims and preparation

of maps in the most serious bottleneck in implementation of this

Act. The authentic maps are also not available in many cases again

attracting the intervention of revenues or forest department.

11. It is also very difficult for villagers (Forest Rights Committee) from

remote areas to travel large distance to submit the claims to the

Sub-divisional level Committee. In such cases the district collectors

and sub-divisional officers have to authorise the official of welfare

department to receive the claims from the Forest Rights Committee

but then it is difficult to track the station of those claims as in most

cases the officials are ignorant and claims are not forwarded in

time.

12. In most of the states the authentic data regarding the occupation of

land before the cut off date i.e. 13.12.2005 such as remote sensing

maps etc. are not available for whole area thereby creating a major

problem in ascertaining the claims for rights over the land.

13

13. In protected areas, the process of claiming right is continuing but

due to lack of organization, there are efforts to illegally relocate

them.

14. In some cases sub-divisional level committee arbitrarily rejects

claims on the basis of superfluous criteria and lack of evidences. At

this stages also there are some confusions regarding the acceptance

of the evidence for recognition of rights.

15. Even at the district level committee there has been cases of serious

violation such as.

(a)The titles were distributed with reduction in extent of resources

claimed, moreover the rights were granted on very few common

property like grazing land, water bodies and Non Timber Forest

Produce. Habitation rights and other such important rights are

ignored.

(b)The customary rights and traditional boundary are ignored in

provided titles for unilateral reduction in size of land.

(c) GPS technologies are abused to manipulate maps and areas for

which titles are being given.

(d) It is also seen that few cases are hanged between Forest Rights

Act, 2006 and Sub Divisional Level Committee and are not taken to

District Level Committee for further action.

(e) Both IR and CFR rights are denied to Other Traditional Forest

dwellers community.

16.As regards maintenance of records of rights, rule 12A of the

amendment rules 2012 dt. 6.9.12 provides that on completion of the

process of recognition of rights and issuance of titles under the rules. The

revenue and the forest departments shall prepare a final map of forest land

so vested and the concerned authorities shall incorporate the forest rights

so vested in the revenue and forest records within the specified period of

14

record updation under the relevant state laws or within a period of three

months, whichever is earlier. This provision is not followed properly in

majority of cases throughout the country

Gaps at Policy Level

There are some important issues and ambiguities at the policy level

also, besides the large fraction of the problems in the poor implementation

of Forest Rights Act, 2006. The important gaps at policy level are:-

1. The terms “primarily resides in” and “bona fide livelihood have

not been quantified and explained in detail in the Act. Hence,

there are serious confusion during field work in implementation

of the Act. The members of Forest Rights Acts, 2006 and the

officials are not clear about the extent and permissible limits in

many cases.

2. The responsibility of verification of claims has not been given to

the department who is in possession of the land and its document

with time limits to complete the process of verification in

accordance with the Act and the Rules.

3. Problems in exercise of rights and management of community

forest resources, even where the titles were given, there lie

numerous issues with Gram Sabha in excreting the rights. This is

mostly due to lack of clarity regarding post title governance and

management in granted common resources.

4. Ambiguity regarding role of forest department and other

government agencies in Community Forest Resource received

areas. This is relevant in view of continued operation of forest

department through working plan activities. Lack of clarity on

15

integration of CFRe management plan with working plan and

management plan of Forest Department.

5. In Forest Rights Act,2006 amended rule 2012, it is mentioned

that, in rule 4 after clauses (e) which talks about constitution of

committee by the Gram sabha for management of CFRe, the

following clause shall be inserted, it reads as under:(f) monitor and

control the committee constituted under clause (e) which shall

prepare a conservation and management plan for community forest

resources in order to sustainably and equitably manage such

community forest resources for the benefit of forest dwelling

scheduled tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers and integrate

such conservation and management plan with the micro plans or

working plans or management plans of the forest department with

such modifications as may be considered necessary by the

committee.

6. Forest Rights Act, 2006 did not specify how villages would

manage forest after Community Forest Resource is granted. It was

observed that the community is facing lot of challenges in selling

of Non Timber Forest Produce and bamboo procured by them

under Community Forest Resource. The major challenge is to look

for captive market, secondly communities which have no

government support are not well equipped to handle this new

business and thirdly they have to stay careful from stake holder

ready to manipulate the market.

7. Continued operation of the government, in diverting forest lands

for non forest purposes. There is apprehension that proposed Land

Acquisition bill and Mines and Mineral development bill will make

it possible for the government to take away rights given under

Forest Rights Act, 2006. Forest diversion are taking place in large

16

scale (with about 2 lakhs hectare diverted since Forest Rights

Act,2006 came into operation) are taking place without compliance

to forest right act and Ministry of Environment and Forest circular

of 30 July 2009. Further lease and contracts in forest and continued

work of plantation by forest department continue without

consultation or consent of gram sabha.

8. The existing law like Forest conservation Act, 1980 and Wild life

protection Act, 1972 as well as other policies and programme

particularly in forest and MFPs need to be reviewed in view to

facilitate exercises of the right and community management of

Community Forest Resource.

9. Claims from Other Traditional Forest Dwellers are not

recognized in most states, partly due to wrong interpretation that

they required to have occupied land for three generation. There is

also difficulty in providing evidences. No documentary evidences

are available to prove that they are living in the area for 75 years.

Special attention should be provided to give justice to these

communities under Forest Rights Act, 2006.

10. The provision for community / habitat right of Primitive Tribal

Group, pre agricultural communities is not implemented properly

so far. There is lack of clarity on mechanism for claiming right.

Such communities are mostly interested for habitats right as its

gives them a permanent settlement.

11. Awareness about Community Forest Resource provision in

Forest Rights Act, 2006, under protected areas is very low.

Community Forest Resource have been recognized in only few

protected area like Simlipal tiger reserve in Orissa. Recognition of

right in protected area and tiger reserve are continued to be major

concern with relocation and eviction by forest department. It has

17

also been noticed that the relocation is simply involves including a

monetary settlement of right. The protocol released by National

Tiger Conservation Authority on relocation from tiger reserve is not

in conformity with the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and is apprehended

to lead to more violation of forest right in tiger reserves.

It is due to these gaps at policy and implementation level

there has been a very high rate of rejection of claims submitted

under the Forest Rights Act.

As per the information available with the Ministry of Tribal

Affairs, as of 31 January 2012, a total of 31,68,478 claims have

been received across the country. Of these, a total of 27,24,162

claims (85.98% of the total received) has been disposed of , out of

which 12,51,490 titles (45.94%) were distributed and 14,72,672

claims (54%) were rejected.

State- wise data showing distribution and rejection of claims under FRA as on

31.01.2012 (source: Ministry of Tribal Affairs)

State No. of claims

received

Total No. of

Claims

Disposed off

1% in respect

of claims

received

No. of titles

distributed

No. of

claims

rejected

% of

claims

rejected

w.r.t

claims

disposed

off

Andhra

Pradesh

3,30,479

(3,23,765 individual

and 6,714

community)

3,21,235

(97.20%)

1,67,797

(1,65,691

1individual

and 2,106

community)

1,53,438 47.76

Arunachal NIL (The state govt NIL NIL NIL -

18

Pradesh claims that land and

forest are

communally owned;

therefore FRA has

little relevance)

Assam 1,31,911

(1,26,718 individual

and 5,193

community)

73,936(56.04%

)

36,267

(35,407

individual

and 860

community)

37,669 50.94

Bihar 2,343 1,173(50.06%) 22 1,151 98.12

Chhattisga

rh

4,92,068

(4,87,332

Individual and 4,736

community)

4,88,107

(99.19%)

2,15,443

(2,14,668

individual

and 775

community)

2,72,664 55.86

Goa NIL NIL NIL NIL -

Gujarat 1,91,592

(1,82,869 individual

and 8,723

community)

57,624

(30.07%)

39,784

(38,176

Individual

and 1,608

community)

17,840 30.95

Haryana The state Govt. Has

informed that there

are no forest

dwelling STs and

OTFDs

Nil NIL NIL -

Himachal

Pradesh

5,635 1,876

(33.30%)

7 1,869 99.62

Jharkhand 34,936 28,500

(81.57%)

13,357 15,143 53.13

Karnataka 1,63,090

91,60,305 individual

1,50,348

(92.18%)

6,523

(6,522

1,43,825 95.66

19

and 2,785

community)

individual

and 1

community

Kerala 37,509

(36,140 individual

and 1,369

community)

25,073

(66.84%)

20,821 4,252 16.95

Madhya

Pradesh

4,49,561

(4,40,644 individual

and 8,917

community)

4,24,102

(994.33%)

1,55,542 2,68,560 63.32

Maharasht

ra

3,39,689

(3,35,701

individual and 3,988

community)

3,26,562

(96.13%)

1,04,767

(1,04,344

individual

and 423

community0

2,21,795

(2,20,523

individua

l and 423

communi

ty)

67.91

Manipur NIL NIL NIL NIL -

Meghalaya NIL (The state govt.

Claims that 96% of

forest land is owned

by clan /community/

individual; hence,

FRA has limited

scope).

NIL NIL NIL -

Mizoram NIL NIL NIL NIL -

Nagaland NIL (The state govt

claimed that FRA

does not apply since

there are no forest

dwelling STs or

OTFDs)

Orissa 4,93,522 4,25,454 2,94,623 1,30,831 30.75

20

(4,91,203

Individual and 2,319

community)

(86.20%) Distributed

(2,93,825

Individual

and 798

community)

Rajasthan 64,844

(64,510

individual and 334

community)

60,475

(93.26%)

30,325

(30,280

individual

and 45

community)

30,150 49.85

Sikkim Stated that there are

no forest dwelling

STs and OTFDs

- - - -

Tamil

Nadu

21,781

(18,420 individual

and 3,361

community)

Could not

distribute

titles due to a

restrictive

order from

High Court of

Madras

(3,723 titles

are ready for

distribution)

- -

Tripura 1,79,639

(1,79,362 individual

and 277 community)

21,384

1,41,821

(78.39%)

1,19,437

(1,19,382

individual

and 55

community)

17,705(16.89

1

73,001 80.48

Uttar

Pradesh

92,406

(91,271

Individual and 1,135

90,706

(98.16%)

Individual

and 814

community)

21

community)

Uttarakhan

d

182 1 (0.54%) NIL 1 100

West

Bengal

1,37,278

(1,29,454 individual

and 7,824

community)

1,08,169

(78.79%)

29,070

(28,962

individual

and 108

community)

79,099 73.12

A&N

Islands

NIL (The NIL

Administration

has claimed

that FRA does

not apply).

NIL NIL -

Daman &

Diu

Dadra &

Nagar

Haveli

NIL (no forest

villages)

NIL

NIL

NIL

NIL

NIL

NIL

NIL

-

-

Lakshadwe

ep

NIL

(The Administration

stated that there are

no forest tribes or

OTFDs)

NIL NIL - NIL

Total 31,68,478 27,24,162

(85.98%)

12,51,490 14,72,67

2

54.05

Conclusion and Recommendation:-

Based on the above discussion and field experience it may be

concluded that this is a comparatively new Act and the most important steps

are to be started by forest rights committee comprising of mostly tribals

22

having low literacy rate, sincere efforts are required to be taken for capacity

building to enhance awareness. This may be done by regular training of the

stakeholders. Besides this all government officials of all concerned

departments are also required to be trained regularly for better

implementation. Some responsible officials may be assigned duties to help

the stakeholders to fill up the forms and submit their claims properly.

The relevant maps and documents should be made available to the

Forest rights committee and claimants at easy approach. Steps should be

taken for better liasioning between revenues department and forest

department officials to facilitate the verification of claims within a time

frame. This is the most difficult and important step in the whole process of

implementation of this Act and it also requires the maximum technical

expertise along with involvement of all stakeholders and hence sincere

efforts are required at this stage.

The meeting at Sub divisional level committee and District level

committee level should be conducted on regular basis to take decision at the

earliest.

The most important action after the final decision of the District level

committee is the delineation (marking the boundary) of the land and its

incorporation in the revenue and forest maps after which the area should be

excluded as per the provisions of the Act. In fact this is the most neglected

part of the implementation of Act in many states and in future it may create

very serious problems for all concerned including forests. In most of the

states this action is not being done despite several reminders by Govt. of

India.

The tribal department with the help of forest department and revenue

department should try to convince the Scheduled tribes and other traditional

forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights) Act, 2006 regarding the

23

conservation of forest, community forest reserve and also regarding the

duties described in the Act.

The conclusions based on the above observation and discussion can

be summarized as follows:-

1) This Act is a recently enforced Act therefore proper care has to

be taken at all levels for effective and correct implementation of the

Act.

2) A mass awareness programme for FRC/SDLC/DLC and

community members should be conducted at regular interval by

Ministry of Tribal Affairs. It will help to bring clarity as well as

foster the implementation process. The nodal agencies or state

government should take care of production and distribution of

simple accurate guide material for FRC/SDLC/DLC. Field visit

should be organised for communities to learn from one another

experiences in forest governance.

3) Strengthening gram sabha : Although instruction have been

given by Ministry of Tribal Affairs through states to revenue and

forest departments to provide all necessary records and evidences to

gram sabha, to facilitate Community Forest Resource claims but for

most cases it is unnecessarily delayed by the govt official.

Therefore strict steps should be taken to ensure that the instruction

is followed. The officials should also focus on explaining and

clarifying the differences between Community Forest Resource

claims under section 3(1) and diversion of forest land for public

utilities under section 3(2) to avoid confusion in claim filing.

4) Particular attention is needed to Community Forest Resource and

habitat rights for disprivileged group such as Primitive tribal group,

nomads and shift cultivators. Special process is needed in case of

24

nomads as it is difficult for them to make claim all along their

route. Rights of Primitive tribal group should be pro actively

recognised and declared using the same criteria that had been used

to declare them as Primitive tribal group.

5) Ensuring customary boundaries: All states should ensure that

Community Forest Resource claims and titles follow customary

boundaries and are not artificially restricted by consideration such

as Joint Forest Management, Van Surakshya Samiti etc. Or other

such boundaries set by government.

6) Compliance of Forest Rights Act, 2006 in forest land diversion:

In July 2009, Ministry of Environment and Forest, made a circular

saying Gram sabha consent is compulsory before granting

clearance for diversion of land, now it should be expanded for

forest land uses such as plantation and be made legally binding

through rules under Forest Rights Act, 2006.

7) Transparency building mechanism‐ Minutes of the meeting of

Sub Divisional Level Committee and District Level Committee

should be put in to public domain, as it will communicate status of

Implementation. Regular public hearing should be done to hear the

grievances.

8) Particular attention is needed for protected areas to implement

Forest Rights Act, 2006 particularly Community Forest Resource.

The ongoing relocation from tiger reserve must be stopped. The

protocol released by National Tiger Conservation Authority on

relocation need to be withdrawn as it hinders Forest Rights Act,

2006 implementation. The communities should be allowed to stay

in their own habitat and cash compensation option should be

withdrawn. The process of recognition of right should be strictly

monitored and it should also be monitored that conservation

25

outcomes are also achieved. We need to understand that forest is

habitat both for man and animal and right for both should be

ensured. All possibilities of co‐existence within such habitat should

found out through consultation with local communities.

9) Post title support for management and conservation: Under

section 3(1) I and section 5, the hamlet will have committees to

conserve and manage the forest resources. Government should

ensure membership of women in these committees and should

capacitate the committees. There should be appropriate Forest

Rights Act,2006 rules or Forest Rights Act,2006 amendment to

provide clear cut powers and authority to institution to carry out the

role described in section 3(1)(i) and section 5. The relationship of

the gram sabha and its committee with the forest department needs

to be clarified.

10) Community Forest Resource titles: Ministry of Tribal Affairs

should issue clarification to states that titles cannot be issued with

any condition and all such titles issued in past must be rectified.

Titles should be given on all rights claimed and over full area

claimed by Gram sabha as per customary boundaries.

11) The role of forest department needs to undergo gradual

transformation from that of regulation and control on forest to that

of service agency which monitors forest management and

conservation and provides technical guidance and capacity building

to local communities for better forest governance.

12) Funding schemes that are proposed by Ministry of Environment

and Forest relating to natural resources should be channelized

through Gram sabha and PRI. Various programmes like Green

India Mission, bio fuel plantation, CAMPA and so on are currently

being processed without having much control of gram sabha. All

26

these should be channelized through gram sabha for decentralized

governance and also it will support the grass root level institution.

13) Review needs to be carried out of environment related

programmes and laws to bring it in consonance with Forest Rights

Act, 2006.

References

1. www.forestrightsact.com

2. www.tribal.nic.in

3. www.moef.nic.in