Constitution Conduct Group Reminds the Government its obligations under FRA , demands for review of the process in Sijimali.

We are members of the Constitutional Conduct Group, a collective of former civil servants belonging to the All-India Services and the Central Services. Our group, which has no political affiliation, is committed to the promotion of the foundational values of our Republic and the observance of norms of Constitutional conduct.

We are deeply concerned that Odisha, a state with the fourth largest forest cover in India, and the third largest number of Scheduled Tribes is steadily moving to destroy and denude both. Large tracts of forests inhabited by Scheduled Tribes and utilized for their livelihood are being surrendered to mining and other industrial projects, thereby reducing the forests to sparse and scattered tree cover and the Scheduled Tribes to a state of penury.

We focus today on Sijimali, in Rayagada district of Odisha, about which we had written an open letter on 19 April, 2026 expressing our serious concern about how the landmark Supreme Court   judgement of 2013 on the acquisition of tribal homelands and forest lands in Niyamgiri, in  Odisha, was being violated and how Gram Sabha resolutions regarding consent to the acquisition of forest land were allegedly falsified.   There has been no positive consideration of these issues in these several months; instead, there has been further deterioration in the legal protection given to tribal people in this region.

We are particularly distressed to see that Lada Sikaka, a Dongria Kandha leader, who has been democratically and peacefully expressing his apprehensions about wrongful inroads of mining companies into tribal lands, was arrested on 10 September 2026 and has reportedly been charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Other tribal leaders such as Lingaraj Azad and Hiramaal Naik and scores of other tribal inhabitants of the area, who were demanding protection of their jal, jungle and zameen (water, forests and land) were arrested and have been shown as accused in the police records.

As former civil servants who have served in different capacities under the state and central governments, we are not strangers to the plethora of investment proposals being made to various   state governments to acquire and use forest lands, which are also often tribal homelands, and the different packages being offered to make the proposals attractive and acceptable to the local communities. We are also aware of the gaps between the promises made and those actually kept. While we agree that all industrial or mining proposals cannot or should not be opposed, we would like to emphasize that the correct forum to take a decision on such matters is an open and informed Gram Sabha. This is the essence of the Supreme Court judgement in the Niyamgiri case.

The practice of consulting the concerned Gram Sabha before the government agreed to the diversion of forest lands for industries, mining or other purposes was, in fact, the practice until the year 2022. As per the Forest (Conservation) (FC) Rules of 2017 the District Collector was to obtain consent of each Gram Sabha having jurisdiction over the whole or part of the forest land indicated in the proposal for diversion. Thus, the consent of the Gram Sabha to the diversion of forest lands was essential prior to the project proposal being considered by the central government. This was amended in the FC Rules of 2022, with the stipulation that the central government would first grant approval to the project and only thereafter require the state government to de-reserve or divert the forest land as required, as well as accommodate the forest rights of the people.  There is no mention of the Gram Sabha at all.  The rights of the forest dwellers, Scheduled Tribes as well as others, have been clearly treated as secondary and given short shrift.

We would like to point out that the 2022 Forest (Conservation) Rules violate the provisions of the Forest Rights Act (FRA). The Preamble to the FRA clearly states, inter alia, that the Act was passed because “it has become necessary to address the long-standing insecurity of tenurial and access rights of forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers including those who were forced to relocate their dwelling due to State development interventions”. The Act goes on to spell out in detail the important role of the Gram Sabha in the grant of forest rights, both individual and community rights. That the FC Rules of 2022 totally ignores consultation with the Gram Sabha before the government grants approval to the diversion of the forest lands is thus not only irregular but illegal. Rules cannot supplant Acts and privately owned forest lands cannot be given away by the government without consultation with the owners, or the Gram Sabha which represents them.

We are particularly amazed to learn that the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MOTA) in their official communication dated 31.8.2026 addressed to the NHPC desk of the Ministry of Power stated that there is no provision to obtain consent of the Gram Sabha under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA) before granting clearance to diversion of forest lands.  Instead of defending the claims of the ST and other traditional forest dwellers made in the FRA, which MOTA itself had got passed in Parliament and instead of interpreting the law rationally, it has made a facile, superficial statement.  A rational and consistent interpretation would have been to note that the existing forest rights, which had not been recognised through land record documents, were duly recognised by a detailed process spelt out in the 2006 Act. The Gram sabha was a crucial institution in this entire process. Therefore, such rights recognised by the gram sabha cannot be taken away by some other institution or body. Essentially, only the Gram Sabha can take a decision on such matters.

We note with serious concern that these policy shifts are neither legally sound nor will they serve the cause of the livelihood and wellbeing of tribals and other forest dwelling people or, even more importantly, of the environment. We would also like to remind in this Super El Nino year that we have three important global frameworks covering the period 2015 to 2030,  which require us to take care of the environment: 1. Sustainable Development Goals 2. COP 26 Agreement and 3. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.  There is an urgent need to restore the protective framework for environment, with people’s participation.

We strongly urge the Government to

1. review the rules relating to diversion of forest land and ensure that the primacy of the Gram Sabha in protecting the rights of forest dwellers is upheld;
2. ensure that persons advocating the rights of the people on land, water and forests, democratically and peacefully are not arrested and made to languish in jails:
3. ensure that the cases of those already arrested are reviewed at the earliest for grant of bail and
4. start the process of consultation and open dialogue, rather than persisting with the coercive approach.

SATYAMEVA JAYATE

Yours sincerely,

Constitutional Conduct Group

List of signatories

(The Constitution Conduct Group a body of former civil servants takes up the Sijimali case of Odisha where the government has unleashed a reign of terror to hand over the hills to Vedanta for bauxite miming.)

Comments

0 comments