HC refers the demand for for forest rights to SLC in Melghat reserve
Nagpur: The high court Nagpur Bench of Bombay has placed the ball in the court of the state government on the grant of 3,000 hectares of forest area under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, in Madizadap in Melghat Tiger Reserve (MTR) in Amravati district.
The HC had taken suo motu notice of the report published on December 5 by TOI entitled’ Grant of CFR in Melghat tiger reserve in violation of the law.’ On April 20, 2011, the Madizadap gram sabha had claimed community forest rights (CFR) on over 3,000 hectares, and also fishing rights.
The District Level Committee (DLC) headed by district collector accepted CFR, even though the assertion of this village was dismissed four times earlier by the Sipna Wildlife Division’s deputy conservator of forests. The DLC had the CFR claim considered for the fifth time.
The rights were measured in 11 Melghat wildlife sanctuary compartments, now part of the tiger reserve. According to a correspondence from Sipna DyCF Dr. Sivabala S to DLC chairman and district collector, the claims under consideration were inadmissible as there is no evidence to prove that these people occupied forest land before the 13 December 2005 cut-off date.
According to Sivabala, even before the date of entry into force (September 6, 2012) of the amended laws, the forest rights committee (FRC) started the process of verification of claims.
Judges RK Deshpande & Amit Borkar took the matter up for hearing on Monday along with a criminal PIL filed by Akot’s environmental lawyer Vijay Singh Chauhan.
Government pleader Sumant Deopujari, arguing on behalf of the forest, tribal and income departments, told the court that there is a difference of opinion between the Amravati district collector and forest department and, therefore, requested the court to refer the matter to a state-level committee (SLC) set up to monitor the process of recognition.
The SLC, which has 12 members, is headed by the chief secretary. Its members are the PCCF and tribal, revenue, forest, and panchayat raj department, secretaries.
Counsel for petitioner Manish Jeswani argued that forest land is being systematically diverted to tiger-reserve villagers under alleged pressure from the tribal department in contravention not only of the FRA but also of the Forestry Conservation Act (FCA), 1980, and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
“The SLC may, therefore, be required to take a decision in accordance with the law and within a time frame,” he told the court.
Ultimately, the HC bench disposed of the PIL and referred Madizadap’s CFR question to SLC and asked to take a decision within four months.
