Uttarakhand
,
Ramnagar
,
Nainital
Published :
Sep 2016
|
Updated :
Forest Dwellers in Uttarakhand Oppose ESZ around Jim Corbett National Park
Reported by
Tarun Joshi
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
People affected
2013
Year started
37700
Land area affected
Households affected
People Affected
2013
Year started
37700
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The National Wildlife Action Plan (2002–2016) of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) stipulated that state governments should declare land falling within 10 kilometres of the boundaries of national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, called buffer zones, as eco-fragile or eco-sensitive zones (ESZs) under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The purpose of the ESZ is to provide more protection to the parks by acting as a shock absorber or transition zone.

Following this, the area around the Jim Corbett National Park and Tiger Reserve was declared an ESZ. But the people residing in the buffer zone are not happy. One of the residents, Virendra Singh, said in a EPW study that ESZ will further buffer the buffer zone and that already the buffer zone restricts many activities.

The ESZ guidelines, issued in February 2011, maintains that felling of trees, drastic change in agriculture systems and commercial use of natural water resources, including groundwater harvesting and setting up of hotels and resorts, will be regulated in these areas. This has raised fear among the forest-dwelling communities who believe it will affect their livelihood and sustenance. 

In 2013, due to public opposition, Corbett Mahotsav was cancelled. The event was the state's initiative to celebrate 75 years of the Corbett National Park. In 2014, when the villagers visited their local temple to pray for a good harvest, seven persons were arrested on serious charges under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, for forest and wildlife offences and were kept in custody for nine days. They were also charged for repairing the temple using cement and tiles, harming trees and entering the park area without permission.

The village residents have organised together under the Eco-sensitive Zone Virodhi Sangarsh Samiti to oppose ESZ around the park. They say that with the implementation of the ESZ, all developmental activities in their villages and towns as well as their agricultural work will be affected. It would also affect education, healthcare and basic facilities such as electricity and water connection. The residents would also be denied permission to make permanent concrete houses or fence their properties.

However, according to a report in 2019, while the forest department was enforcing the norms of the ESZ, the Jim Corbett administration had still not notified its ESZ. "In its draft notification, only a buffer of one kilometre has been provided for," the report says. In February 2020, the state decided to notify the 377 square kilometres of Corbett Tiger Reserve as ESZ. The government claims that to avoid the inclusion of any village in the area, the maximum area defined is 7.69 kilometres as opposed to 10 kilometres.

The state Cabinet meeting held in February 2020 approved the exclusion of all 36 villages falling under the ESZ of Corbett Tiger Reserve; a proposal for the same was sent to the MoEFCC for approval. Officials of the state Forest Department were also quoted as saying that serious discussions were underway for considering the exclusion of different villages from ESZ in Uttarakhand so that developmental activities, as requested by the residents of several villages, can take place smoothly.

On 28 February 2024, the NGT responded to a petition pointing out the damage to the forests due to construction and pleading for the notification of an ESZ around the park. The NGT issued a notice to the respondents in the case including Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, National Board for Wildlife, National Tiger Conservation Authority, Central Empowered Committee (formed by the Supreme Court), and the states of Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh along with their principal chief conservators of forests and the district magistrates concerned.

The next hearing of the case is in August 2024.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

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

Residential area, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Yes

Source/Reference

<https://www.jagran.com/uttarakhand/nainital-villagers-of-ramnagar-struggled-to-get-out-of-eco-sensitive-zone-20026921.html>

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Community's original demands were met

Amidst long-standing protests in 2019, the area of ESZ was reduced from 2 km to 1 km, covering around five villages. By November 2019, 35 of the 36 declared ESZs, except Dhela village, were excluded from the ESZ, which led to large-scale protests by Dhela residents. In February 2020, the decision to exclude the remaining village was taken in a cabinet meeting of the state government, and a proposal for the same was sent to the MoEFCC for approval.

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Forest department, Forest administration of Jim Corbett National Park, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change

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?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Residents of Dhela, Patrani, Sawalde, Himmatpur Dotiyal, Gaujani, Garjiya, Dhikuli and other villages of Ramnagar.

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
Tarun Joshi
Show more work
Latest updates
East Jaintia Hills
Meghalaya

Violent protest during public hearing for cement plant expansion in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills

Narela
Delhi

Residents of Narela's Bajitpur Thakran oppose demolition of temples for defence institute, demand sports complex

Surguja
Chhattisgarh

Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest

Kamrup Metropolitan
Assam

Lawyer bodies protest against Assam government’s decision to relocate Gauhati High Court

Faizabad
Uttar Pradesh

Demands for Ram Temple, Babri Mosque at same site divides Ayodhya

Mumbai
Maharashtra

Supreme Court Allows Land Reclamation for Mumbai Coastal Road Project

Pune
Maharashtra

Farmers Refuse Land for Pune Outer Ring Road Project in Maharashtra

Surat
Gujarat

Slum Dwellers in Gujarat's Surat Stage Protest against Demolition, Forced Eviction

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect 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

Residential area, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Yes

Source/Reference

<https://www.jagran.com/uttarakhand/nainital-villagers-of-ramnagar-struggled-to-get-out-of-eco-sensitive-zone-20026921.html>

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