Reported by
Legal Review by
Edited by
Updated by
Published on
July 10, 2018
May 17, 2022
Edited on
July 10, 2018
The Sevoke-Rangpo broad gauge railway project, the only other connecting link between Sikkim and the rest of India in addition to NH-10, is facing opposition by forest dwellers affected by the project. They have alleged that the project violates the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006. The railway project holds significance for India because of the geographical location of Sikkim, which is surrounded by Nepal, Bhutan and China, even as the latter is trying to develop its hegemony in the region by building infrastructure and communication. Local organisations, such as the Himalayan Forest Villagers Organisation (HFVO), North Eastern Society for Preservation of Nature and Wildlife and Uttar Banga Ban Jan Shramajibi Manch, have protested against the implementation mechanism of the project. The railway line, which is proposed to be laid between Sevoke (in Darjeeling district in West Bengal) and Rangpo (in Sikkim), covers 52.7km, of which 51.7 km falls under the Gorkha Territorial Administration (GTA) in Darjeeling and Kalimpong districts in West Bengal. According to Lila Kumar Gurung, general secretary of the HFVO, more than 40,000 people in 24 villages will be affected by the project, although the Railways has only identified 26 families. Under the FRA, a project developer requires a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the village assembly (gram sabha) of the area in the presence of at least half of its representatives for acquiring land for developmental purpose. "In 2011, village assemblies were formed by the residents of 24 villages, but the GTA did not recognise them," said Swarup Saha, a leader of Uttar Banga Ban Jan Shramajibi Manch. The forest villages in an area where the FRA is implemented need to be converted into "revenue villages". Invoking the law, the residents of one of the villages demanded the same. But since village assemblies are not recognised in Darjeeling, their demands have remained unfulfilled. Meanwhile, the GTA itself has been issuing NOC for the project, flouting the FRA norm, which stipulates that a village assembly has the right to consider the diversion of forestland under its jurisdiction for developmental purpose through a specially convened meeting and after carefully considering all factors. The foundation stone for the project was laid in 2009 by then Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee. The deadline was 2015, but it never saw the light of the day due to massive protests by forest dwellers. In 2015, the National Board For Wildlife (NBFW) gave the green signal to the project on the assurance of the railway board that speed restrictions will be enforced, and animal-tracking sensors will be set up to prevent any harm to the wildlife in the area. It also ordered that tunnels should be dug only during the day. The Supreme Court cleared the project in 2016, subject to the strict guidelines of the NBFW. In 2011, approximately 200 families had applied for forest rights under the FRA. In July 2020, the district officials responded by questioning their rights on the land and rejected their claims. Gurung said, We had been submitting the claim forms since 2008, then we had to submit them again in 2011. We have done this several times. They are only holding us back with such claim forms. We want our villages to be converted into revenue villages." According to local MP Raju Bista, the rejection of claims is an easier route to evict the forest dwellers to facilitate the railway project.
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Refusal to give up land for the project
Complaint against procedural violations
Rural
Common
Forest
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
4100
Type of investment:
Cost of Project
Year of Estimation
Page Number In Investment Document:
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Forest Rights Act of 2006
Legislations/Policies Involved
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Non-implementation/violation of FRA
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Supreme Court of India
Case Number
I.A. no 183-184 in WP (C) 337/1995
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nature of Protest
Campaigns (grassroots organisations/press releases/media)
Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials
Objections as part of official procedures
Protests/marches
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Gorkhaland Territorial Administration, District Administration of Darjeeling, Indian Railways
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Himalayan Forest Villagers Organization (HFVO), North Eastern Society for Preservation of Nature and Wildlife, Uttar Banga Ban Jan Shramajibi Manch
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?
Image Credit:
Image Credit:
© 2023 Nut Graph LLP
All Rights Reserved.
