SYLLABUS

GS-2: Government Policies and Interventions for Development in various sectors and issues arising out of their Design and Implementation; Devolution of Powers and Finances up to Local Levels and Challenges Therein. 

GS-3: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment.

Context: The Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) has stated that the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 does not provide for Gram Sabha consent specifically for Stage-II forest clearance. The position has emerged amid concerns over prolonged forest-clearance timelines for major hydropower projects. 

More on the News

• MoTA’s Position: MoTA has stated that neither the FRA nor its Rules contain a provision requiring Gram Sabha consent for Stage-II forest clearance. It has also indicated that such forest-clearance matters do not fall within its administrative purview.

• NHPC Projects: A Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Undertakings, in its report on NHPC, noted that forest clearance for its under-construction projects takes an average of 106 months and identified Gram Sabha consent as a major bottleneck.

• Teesta-IV: The 520 MW Teesta-IV Hydroelectric Project in North Sikkim was cited as being indefinitely stalled because consent from a small number of Gram Panchayats remained pending.

• Proposed Change: The Committee recommended examining the feasibility of a 70–75% qualified super-majority of affected Gram Sabhas for large hydropower projects of national importance, instead of requiring consent from all affected Gram Sabhas.

Understanding the Forest Rights Act, 2006

• Objective: The FRA seeks to correct the historical injustice faced by forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs) by recognising and vesting forest rights.

• Rights Recognised: These include individual forest rights, community rights, Community Forest Resource (CFR) rights, habitat rights of PVTGs and rights over minor forest produce, among others.

• Gram Sabha under Section 6: The Gram Sabha initiates the process of determining and recognising individual and community forest rights by receiving, verifying and consolidating claims.

• Conservation Role: Section 5 empowers the Gram Sabha and forest-right holders to protect forests, biodiversity, wildlife, water sources and other ecologically and culturally important areas.

• Developmental Facilities: Section 3(2) permits diversion of forest land for specified basic developmental facilities, subject to prescribed conditions and the recommendation of the concerned Gram Sabha.

• Nodal Ministry: Section 11 makes the Ministry of Tribal Affairs the nodal ministry for implementation of the FRA.

How Did Gram Sabha Consent Become Linked to Forest Clearance?

• FRA and Consent: The FRA does not expressly prescribe general Gram Sabha consent as a precondition for diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes or for Stage-II forest clearance.

• Forest-Clearance Guidelines: The linkage developed through the forest-diversion framework under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, under which FRA rights had to be identified, recognised and vested and Gram Sabha-related certification/NOC requirements were incorporated into the clearance process. MoTA itself lists these forest-diversion guidelines under its “Development and FRA” framework.

• 2017 Framework: The 2017 Forest Conservation Rules specifically required the District Collector to complete recognition and vesting of forest rights and obtain consent of each concerned Gram Sabha before forwarding the findings for forest diversion.

• 2022 Rules: The Forest (Conservation) Rules, 2022 changed the sequencing by requiring settlement of FRA rights as part of compliance before the State Government issues the final diversion order, while the rules themselves did not retain the earlier explicit wording on obtaining Gram Sabha consent before in-principle approval.

• Niyamgiri Judgment: In Orissa Mining Corporation v. Ministry of Environment & Forests (2013), the Supreme Court recognised the Gram Sabha’s central role in determining the religious, cultural and community rights of forest-dwelling communities affected by a project.

Gram Sabha, PESA and Community Rights

• PESA, 1996: Extends Part IX of the Constitution to Fifth Schedule Areas, with modifications recognising the role of Gram Sabhas in safeguarding customary practices and community resources.

• FRA–PESA Linkage: The two laws operate in complementary spheres—PESA strengthens tribal self-governance in Scheduled Areas, while FRA recognises and vests forest rights in forest-dwelling communities.

• Community Forest Resource Rights: Recognition of CFR rights gives Gram Sabhas and forest-right holders an important role in protecting, conserving, regenerating and managing community forests.

• Participatory Governance: The Gram Sabha therefore has a wider role under the FRA than merely participating in forest-clearance procedures, extending to rights recognition, community resource management and forest conservation.

Balancing Community Rights and Development

• Developmental Concern: The 106-month average clearance period for NHPC’s under-construction projects highlights the economic and energy-security costs associated with prolonged forest-clearance processes.

• Community Rights: Forest diversion can affect recognised forest rights, livelihoods, customary access to resources and cultural interests of forest-dependent communities.

• Super-Majority Proposal: A 70–75% threshold could reduce delays where a small number of Gram Sabhas withhold consent, particularly for large projects of national importance.

• Rights Safeguard: However, replacing unanimity with a numerical threshold could allow a project to proceed despite objections from affected minority communities; hence, procedural delay and substantive rights-based objections need to be distinguished.

• Way Forward: Establish clear and time-bound FRA-compliance procedures, ensure informed participation of affected Gram Sabhas, and clearly delineate the responsibilities of MoTA, MoEFCC, State governments and local institutions, without diluting legally recognised forest rights.