Gujarat
,
Patan
,
Kutcch, Patan, Surendrangar
Published :
Jan 2024
|
Updated :
August 21, 2024
Denied entry into Little Rann of Kutch, Agariyas of Gujarat's Patan cry foul over discrimination in granting permits
Reported by
Suchak Patel
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
250
Households affected
1200
People affected
2023
Year started
390000
Land area affected
250
Households affected
1200
People Affected
2023
Year started
390000
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Forest Administration (Other than Protected Areas)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Ended
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Forest Administration (Other than Protected Areas)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Ended
1
Summary

Agariyas of the Santalpur block of Gujarat's Patan district have alleged discrimination by the Forest Department officials in granting permits to enter the Little Rann of Kutch (LRK) for salt farming. 

In September 2023, the state government allowed salt pan workers with leases up to 10 acres to continue their traditional salt production in LRK. Since then, several Agariyas from Dhandhdhra, Halwad, and Patadi were given permission to enter the LRK, but none of the 1,200 salt farmers from the Santalpur side of Patan district were allowed to enter the area. 

Agariyas, the traditional salt farmers, have been harvesting salt in the Little Rann of Kutch for decades. The typical salt farming season starts around Dushera in October, but even after two months, the salt farmers were still waiting for the permission. "The Forest Department told us that they need some time to verify and finalize the list ... thus we were waiting. We do not have any other source of livelihood and today sit ideal at home," Narubhai Koli, who has been farming salt for six generations, from the Santalpur Rann was quoted as saying.

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) (Wildlife) Nityanand Srivastava said, “We are allowing only those whose name are there in the settlement report”, though underlining, only those “eligible for one well” will be permitted to do salt farming. However, salt farmers claim their names are mentioned in the government survey and settlement records.

Bharat Singh Dabhi, Lok Sabha Member from Patan, also wrote a letter to the Chief Minister of Gujarat highlighting the fact that Agariyas from his constituency have been denied entry into the LRK despite them being officially listed in government survey and settlement records. He added that the discrepancy in allowing salt farmers from one side while denying access to those from another side within the same LRK raises questions about the Forest Department's operations.

Meanwhile, the Gujarat High Court on 18 January 2024 directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to submit a reply by 29 January in response to a petition filed by members of Agariya community. The court emphasised that Agariyas who possess identity cards, should be permitted to engage in salt farming, as it constitutes their livelihood. The Court found no valid reason, based on the available records, to deny them access to the desert.

The Survey and Settlement Report was prepared to seek a grant from the World Bank to conserve biodiversity of the LRK’s Wild Ass Sanctuary. The report, initiated in September 1997 and completed in 2016, left out a large number of Agariyas from the list, prompting their demand for inclusion. Reportedly, only 189 Agariyas were included in the list for Santalpur block, as against estimates of up to 1,200. 

After the settlement report was released, representatives of aggrieved Agariyas submitted a memorandum to the chief minister, attaching historic documents dating back to the British era and showcasing the community's involvement in salt cultivation. Following which, on 4 September 2023, the state government decided to allow all traditional Agariyas to continue salt harvesting upon simple registration, the verification of which would be done during on-site survey. It was also decided that the survey and settlement process list would be revised by doing on-site survey so that seasonal user rights were recognised on a permanent basis.

In 1973, approximately 4000 square kilometers of LRK was designated as a Wild Ass Sanctuary (WAS), protecting the Indian wild ass, exclusively found in the Kutch region of Gujarat. However, the presence of Agariyas was viewed as a threat to wildlife protection efforts, leading to eviction notices, restricted access to welfare schemes, and a lack of livelihood insurance during natural disasters.

Agariyas, however, claim that there is no conflict between them and wild ass, as census data shows a significant increase in the wild ass population from 700 in 1973 to 6,082 in 2019.

The Agariya community in Santalpur on 12 February published an open letter addressed to the Prime Minister saying that despite numerous appeals to state authorities, including the Chief Minister, Forest Minister, and Forest Department officials, they continue to be unjustly barred from accessing salt pans.

They added that MP of Patan Bharat Singh Dabhi Saheb and Radhnpur MLA Lavingji Thakore, have written letters to the authoritites, but our situation remains unresolved. "Despite our area's consistent support for the BJP, we are left bewildered by the persisting injustice," the letter read.

They further said that livelihoods of 2 lakh people are at stake, with 1,000 Agariyas and their families facing dire circumstances. The cessation of salt production has caused labourers from other states working in factories and railway stations to return home, exacerbating the economic downturn in our community.

The community warned that if their desperate plea continues to fall on deaf ears, 200 of them would personally appeal at the PMO House in Delhi.

The Gujarat government on 13 February 2024 submitted an affidavit in the High Court, stating that individuals intending to cultivate salt within the Wild Ass Sanctuary must obtain prior permission by acquiring an 'Agariya card'. This card is exclusively issued to individuals, entities, or cooperative societies listed in the Survey Settlement Report issued by the sanctuary's settlement officer.

According to the affidavit filed by Dhavalkumar Gadhavi, the Deputy Conservator of Forest (DCF) at the Wild Ass Sanctuary in Dhrangadhra, Surendranagar, the petitioners' names are not mentioned in the 2008 Survey Settlement Report, and they do not possess the required Agariya cards issued by the Forest Department. Only those salt workers possessing such cards are permitted to enter the sanctuary for salt cultivation.

The petitioners, however, assert that they are traditional Agariyas (salt pan cultivators) from Santalpur in Patan's Little Rann of Kutch. They claim to have been cultivating salt there since 2008 and were issued Agariya pothi—a card identifying them as salt pan cultivators. However, the affidavit emphasizes that the Agariya pothi serves merely as an "identification card" for accessing welfare schemes and holds no legal validity for other purposes.

On 12 August 2024, a marathon meeting was held at Patdi Circuit House between MLAs and Agariya representatives to address the concerns of salt workers in Kharaghoda. During the meeting, MLA P K Parmar assured that no Agariya would be stopped from entering the desert to bake salt. Parmar, in direct communication with the Minister of Forest and Environment, assured the Agaria community of the government's support.

During the meeting, it was decided that a comprehensive survey and settlement process for all genuine Agariya workers would be conducted. The findings will be forwarded to the state and central governments for approval to permanently secure the rights of Agariya workers.

The Agariya Maha Sangh is planning a larger meeting in Kharaghoda, where all relevant political figures, including the Chief Minister, will be invited to further discuss and secure the Agariya community's future.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for better access to common land/resources

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Type of Land

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?

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

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Gujarat Forest Department; Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

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:

Agariya Heet-Rakshak Manch

5
Information on the use of criminal law

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?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Suchak Patel
Show more work
Latest updates
Nagaon
Assam

Farmers in Assam resist land acquisition for solar plant, beaten by police

Surat
Gujarat

Surat farmers claim fertile land re-included in Gujarat's development plan without consent

Gadchiroli
Maharashtra

Villagers in Gadchiroli campaign to shut down Surjagarh iron ore mine

Biswanath
Assam

Encroachment, land dispute pose threat to newly designated Behali Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam

Krishnagiri
Tamil Nadu

Residents in Krishnagiri protest against takeover of land by SIPCOT

Lower Siang
Arunachal Pradesh

Tension in Arunachal's Lower Siang over Likabali-Durpai road project amid boundary disputes

Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu revives plan to construct Kanyakumari Port despite protests by fisherfolk

Koraput
Odisha

Bauxite mining at Mali Parbat in Koraput seeks to displace and disrupt local livelihoods

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for better access to common land/resources

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

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?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us