Chhattisgarh
Parsa, Kente, Ghatbarra, Janardhanpur, Fatehpur, Hariharpur, Salhi
,
Tara
,
Surguja
Published :
Sep 2016
|
Updated :
October 16, 2024
Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest
Reported by
Riddhi Pandey
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
411
Households affected
1972
People affected
2011
Year started
1252
Land area affected
411
Households affected
1972
People Affected
2011
Year started
1252
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Coal Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Coal Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

Hasdeo Arand is a large stretch of very dense forest in Central India’s Chhattisgarh. In this forest lie 30 coal blocks, of which three have already commenced mining operations. Parsa Open Cast Mine is one such block, covering more than 900 hectares of forest and agricultural land in Surguja district. The Parsa block operates under Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited (RRVUNL), a subsidiary of Adani Enterprises Limited, with an aim to produce five million tonnes of coal per annum (MTPA). 

The tribespeople, civil society organisations and political outfits have vehemently opposed the diversion of forestland for coal mining. They have raised concerns over the irreversible damage to the ecology of the forest, its biodiversity as well as to the life and livelihoods of the communities dependent on Hasdeo Arand for generations. At the same time, the forest-dwellers have been demanding land titles under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

In 2010, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) identified Hasdeo Arand as a “no-go region” or mining-prohibited zone. However, the ministry scrapped the provision in 2011 and granted Stage I forest clearance to Tara, Parsa East and Kante Basan (PEKB) blocksreportedly under pressure from other ministries. 

In March 2012, the MoEFCC granted Stage II clearance to the PEKB block for open cast mining on over 2,000 hectares of land, which was likely to affect more than 400 families in five villages in Surguja district. 

Opposing the project, a local lawyer filed a petition against the clearance in the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The NGT directed the MoEFCC to seek fresh advice from the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) and ordered the suspension of all mining activity in the area till the MoEFCC passed further orders following the law. However, the Supreme Court put a partial stay on the NGT decision in 2014. It stated that mining work need not be suspended but that the rest of the NGT guidelines must be complied with.

In January 2015, 20 Gram Sabhas (Village Assemblies) passed resolutions opposing the auction of coal mines in the Hasdeo Arand region. The resolution stated that the mines violated the provisions of the FRA and, therefore, they refused to consent to the mines. 

In [January 2016](https://cprindia.org/system/tdf/articles/Human_Rights_Law_Journal(Kanchi_Kohli), final published.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=6783), district-level authorities revoked the community forest rights for Ghatbarra, one of the affected villages, citing the cause of disturbance to mining operations. The people opposed the decision, calling it ‘unconstitutional’. 

In August 2016, the RRVUNL sought forest and environmental clearances for the Parsa coal block, which intensified the protests. The villagers organised several public meetings and appealed to the state and Union government to curb the impact of the mines and improve the implementation of the FRA and Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996. 

In December 2016, the company also applied to expand the capacity of the PEKB mines from 10 MTPA to 15 MTPA. The MoEFCC granted environmental clearance to the project in August 2018, despite public opposition. After much deliberation, on 15 January 2019, the FAC also decided to grant in-principal approval to the Parsa coal block on the condition that the state must confirm the presence or absence of very dense forest in the area. Notably, the affected Gram Sabhas did not give their consent. Regardless, on 13 February 2019, the MoEFCC granted Stage I clearance to the project. 

In defiance, residents of 20 villages protested against the government’s decision in May 2019 under the banner of Hasdeo Arand Bachao Sankarsh Samiti. Between October and December that year, they staged multiple sit-in protests against land acquisition for coal mining. According to Alok Shukla, convener of Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan, the settlement of forest rights of the Gond tribe remains incomplete. Until 2020, the land acquisition was reportedly underway. 

On 21 October 2021, the MoEFCC granted Stage-II forest clearance for the project and on 6 April 2022, the Chhattisgarh government granted the final approval of non-forestry use of land and coal mining for Parsa Opencast Coal Mining project with 15 conditions.

Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan, an NGO which has been raising questions over mining projects in Handeo Aranya Forest region, claimed that the state government violated the provisions given under fifth schedule of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996, and Forest Rights Act, 2006.

In December 2022, the Supreme Court refused to ban the Parsa coal block mineral project. The judge denied interim relief saying it will not come in the way of development.

In December 2023, trees were felled amid police protection for the Parsa East and Kete Basan (PEKB) Phase-2 expansion coal mines in Hasdeo Arand area of ​​​​Surguja district. People protesting against coal mining in Hasdeo area were detained by the police. Although Chief Minister Vishnu Dev Sai gave a statement in the Assembly premises that he has received information about people protesting against deforestation, no arrests were made.

Thousands of trees have been cut in the forest spread over 137 hectares in the Hasdeo Arand area. It is alleged that more than 2.50 lakh trees are to be cut here in the coming days for the PEKB coal mine.

On 24 March 2024, unidentified individuals allegedly set the protest site of the Hasdeo Aranya Jungle Bachao Andolan on fire. This incited widespread condemnation and distress. “Some unidentified miscreants reached the site late at night and torched our stage at Hariharpur. We still do not know who did this, but who will it be, other than the people we are protesting against?” Ramlal Kariyam from the Hasdeo Aranya Bachao Sangharsh Samiti told The Mooknayak.

Despite continuous protest by tribals against the project, the deforestation drive in Chhattisgarh’s Pendramar forest started for the second phase of the PEKB mining project in August 2024. The police detained more than 100 villagers who had been protesting against coal mining in the ecologically sensitive Hasdeo area, according to activists. However, the charge denied by the law enforcement agency.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Complaint against procedural violations

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 and Non-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

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

1960

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2010

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:

Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change; Chhattisgarh Directorate of Geology and Mining; Forest Department

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Adani Coal Company

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Gond tribe

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
Riddhi Pandey


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

Refusal to give up land for the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Complaint against procedural violations

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

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, 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