Welcome to our latest newsletter, packed with new stories, conflict reports and legal insights to keep you informed about ongoing land and natural resource conflicts and the policy developments around them. Let the scrolling begin!

When technology is the snag 
This month we bring you a rather important story on forest rights, from Gujarat. Our Writing Fellow Sukriti Vats travelled to several villages in the state’s Sabarkantha district to examine the status of forest rights’ claims. Tribal communities had been complaining about opaqueness in the use of satellite imagery by the government-appointed GEER Foundation to verify claims under the Forest Rights Act (FRA). Collating data, filing RTIs and doing what she does best—documenting testimonies from communities—Sukriti found out that local administration was dismissing villagers claims based solely on GEER inputs that contradicted mapping done on the ground, and in violation of court orders. Since GEER operates under the forest department, this process has created distrust among tribals, who are facing not just dispossession but also the fear of eviction by the forest department. It has also undermined the intended empowerment of the Gram Sabha. Read the full report in IndiaSpend here.

New in our Database

We currently track 781 ongoing conflicts in the LCW database, affecting around 9.4 million people. Last month, our dedicated researchers added seven new conflicts and provided six critical updates. Let’s take a closer look:

1. Since January 2023, over 55 families have been evicted from the Chirang Reserve Forest in Assam for illegal encroachment. Further evictions occurred in Sonapur, Laimuthi, and Runikhata, with authorities reclaiming significant forest land from rubber plant cultivators, leading to arrests and protests. Read the full report by researcher Emilo Yanthan here.
2. Emilo reports another conflict where the locals are raising concerns over the potential impact of the Rs 498 crore Maa Kamakhya Temple Access Corridor project, on historically significant monuments and sacred water sources. However, the state government defended the project, asserting it would not harm the temple's integrity.
3. Around 40 landless families from north Tripura have set up temporary shelters in Pekuacherra forests, seeking government intervention for permanent land. Previously evicted from government land, they face displacement due to expansion projects. Emilo reports that despite legal prohibitions on settling in reserved forests, these families hope for a humanitarian resolution from authorities.
4. Emilo reports from Nagaland's Dimapur about how illegal construction of shops on a pedestrian walkway in New Market sparked a conflict between the New Municipal Building Watch Committee (NMBWC) and the New Market Business Owners Association (NMBOA). Allegations of unauthorised construction for financial gain led to disputes and a murder.
5. Locals and environmental activists in Mizoram have accused the National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation (NHIDCL) of violating environmental laws, alleging that highway widening has led to deforestation, river pollution, and landslides. Protests and official inspections have resulted in some construction halts and legal actions against NHIDCL. Read the full report by East Street Journal Asia.
6. In December 2023, locals in Jafrabad, Gujarat, opposed the removal of mangroves in a coastal regulation zone (CRZ) for a cricket ground. A public interest litigation highlighted the illegal activity, prompting the Gujarat High Court to intervene. Authorities ordered land restoration, and an investigation was launched against those responsible for environmental damage. Read the full conflict report by our Gujarat researcher Suchak Patel.
7. The Tamil Nadu government's plan to denotify 300.17 hectares of non-forest land is seen as facilitating industrial projects like the Adani-Kattupalli port expansion, and has raised fears of habitat loss and industrial encroachment. Read full report by our researcher Raju k k.

   Updates:

8. The declaration of village land as protected forest areas in a hill district of Manipur resulted in evictions. As of October 2023, the displaced residents of K. Songjang are sheltering in Joujangtek village, with ongoing protests and ethnic tensions continuing to escalate.
9. Forest dwellers in Uttarakhand oppose Ecologically Sensitive Zones (ESZ) around Jim Corbett National Park, as the 2020 state decision excluded 36 villages from the ESZ to facilitate development.
10. Uttarakhand's Tongia villages win the battle for revenue status under FRA in 2023, enabling access to development schemes and basic facilities. However, Bagga-54 did not meet the conversion standards, and Hazara Tongia Village will receive revenue status only after displacement from the Rajaji National Park.
11. Community members protest the interstate Kishau dam project in north India over displacement, biodiversity loss, and seismic safety, with Himachal Pradesh requesting central funding or an interest-free loan.
12. Around 40 villages in Uttarakhand, displaced by the Tehri dam, were declared revenue villages in August 2020, making them eligible for government schemes. However, discrepancies in granting revenue status and ownership rights persist on a significant scale.
13. The High Court of Uttarakhand ordered a stay on the construction of a Jindals School in Nanisar village in May 2019, which was lifted in 2022, despite opposition by Almora residents. Later in 2023, the site became controversial again when the school chairman, Pratik Jindal, was found guilty of assaulting staff.

Victories for Landowner Rights across the Country

On 6 June, the Telangana High Court held that allottees who were given land through state allocation schemes ought to get the same amount of compensation as those who bought land privately. The case involved land acquisition for setting up a National Investment and Manufacturing Zone (NIMZ) in Zaheerabad. The complainants, who were allottees of the state government, belonged to marginalised sections of society, and had received differential amounts as compared to formal landowners in the same area. While the court did not set aside the land acquisition procedure, it did state that differential compensation would be discriminatory.

On 20 June, the Allahabad High Court passed a significant judgment holding that acquisitions carried out under state laws, which had not been finalised until 1 January 2014, would be governed by the Land Acquisition Act of 2013 for the purposes of determining compensation. The land acquisition process in this case began in 1979. While the government had taken possession of the land in 2002, it did not announce the compensation until 2024. The court emphasised that the state government could not continue to delay the compensation while taking advantage of the non-applicability of timelines under state laws. In the wake of the systematic whittling down of provisions of LARR since 2020, this judgment would help landowners in the state claim enhanced compensation.

Meanwhile on the same day, a case regarding land acquisition for the Sabarimala Airport was taken up by the Kerala High Court. The original case was filed by a charitable trust—to contest the acquisition notification, contending that the process would illegally take over a rubber plantation—and the residents of Kottayam, who opposed the social impact assessment (SIA) report published. The Advocate General stated that the government would withdraw the notifications and conduct a fresh SIA study.

Support our Work

If you like our research and what we do at Land Conflict Watch, we’d like to draw your attention to our community membership plan. With our tailored plans, members can access special in-depth reports, policy briefs, curated expert talks, and behind-the-scenes interactions with our writers. It is your support that allows us to document and study the issues that impact the lives of millions in India. To support our work, please consider becoming a member by clicking here.

Editor,
Nayla Khwaja
Communication Officer