Tamil Nadu
,
Masinagudi
,
The Nilgiris
Published :
Jan 2017
|
Updated :
Supreme Court Orders Clearing of Resorts and Buildings In Segur to Make Way for Wildlife
Reported by
Sumana
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
23000
People affected
2008
Year started
202
Land area affected
Households affected
23000
People Affected
2008
Year started
202
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

In 2008, a PIL filed in the Madras High Court asked that at least 500 acres of the Segur Plateau be cleared of human habitation after the Wildlife Trust of India identified it as an important elephant migratory path. Based on the court's directive the state government published several versions of a map demarcating 5 elephant corridors extending over 2800 ha. The maps were contested by the local communities and the many resorts that were affected (some 50 odd resorts). In the meantime, tribal communities in the area (about 300 families) also filed a PIL asking for their rights to be settled under the Forest Rights Act, 2006. The extent of the corridors has been hotly contested with some wildlife biologists, locals and resort owners saying the entire plateau does not need to be protected and that there are several corridors which are free of disturbance and if these are protected, it would be adequate. In 2011, the Madras High Court, based on the state forest department's map, gave the resorts 3 months to vacate the land and said that they could not claim compensation. This order was stayed by the Supreme Court. In 2016, 1000 acres of revenue land in the corridor was notified as reserve forest by the forest department. However, there is still no word on settlement of forest rights or rehabilitation measures that would be extended to the local community. Local villagers are demanding their rights under FRA be settled before the forest department takes control of the land. The court case is still pending and in the meantime there continues to be some police action periodically and continued tension and uncertainty for the villages. In January 2020, the Supreme Court ordered that the area must be cleared of resorts and other buildings and make way for wildlife.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand for rehabilitation

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Both

Forest and Non-Forest, Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

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

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?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Tamil Nadu Forest Department

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:

Tourist Resorts

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

WWF-India

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
Sumana
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

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand for rehabilitation

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

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