FRA claims in state flawed: Former tribal commissioner had warned chief secretary

Nagpur: Even as hue and cry is being made by tribal bodies against Supreme Court ruling on eviction of forest dwellers whose claims have been rejected, former additional tribal commissioner Dr AK Jha had cautioned state chief secretary DK Jain asking him to intervene owing to large-scale irregularities in granting individual and community forest rights (IFRs) and CFRs.
Jha in his letter on July 30, 2018, to the chief secretary pointed out numerous claims which were allowed despite being ineligible under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006. Jha’s tenure (2005-2009) saw maximum number of FRA claims.

Jha has advocated urgent need to fix a time limit for submission of FRA claims as even after almost 10 years FRA implementation, claims are being filed which are becoming more and more difficult to examine with reference to the cut-off date of December 13, 2005.

Jha’ s letter (copy with TOI) calls for urgent need to intervene and improve implementation of FRA, 2006. “FRA is not a bad Act and genuine people should get their rights. But, it is being observed that ineligible persons are taking advantage of it. I have cited many examples of IFRs and CFRs to the chief secretary,” Jha said.

Jha said FRA has given gram sabhas the authority for fixing time limit as well as its extension for making application for forest rights claim. The resultant effect has been that there has remained de facto no time limit in any village as such for the same.

“New claims are still pouring in even after 10 years of enactment of the Act, especially after a circular on ‘Van Mitra’ was issued in 2018 to expedite claims. The time limit for at least the finalization of the cases was very much required,” he said.

FRA was to recognize and vest the forest rights and occupation in forest land in forest dwelling STs and other traditional forest dwellers (OTFDs) who have been residing in such forests for generations but whose rights could not be recorded.

The target population for FRA is very clearly focused and no person other than those who qualify as claimant as per the definitions of FDSTs and OTFDs can be a beneficiary under the FRA unless specifically provided for under this Act. All other agencies, including gram sabhas, are supposed to help and support these two categories of people, but this is not being done.

Jha said regarding cases of IFRs, a study was carried out by the forest department which revealed through satellite imagery that a very large number of finally recognized individual rights cases pertaining to cultivation showed vegetative cover or no-cultivation on the forest land during 2005-06 and was seen as broken and brought under cultivation in the satellite imageries of 2008.

“This clearly showed that the area was broken after cut-off date of December 13, 2005. The ministry of tribal affairs (MoTA), instead of putting this most objective proof on an appropriate pedestal, brought an amendment in 2012 to the FRA Rules, 2008, saying that satellite imagery and other uses of technology may supplement other form of evidence and shall not be treated as a replacement,” said Jha.

Jha’s communication also gives several examples of areas and people where rights have been granted to ineligible claimants. As per state affidavit in apex court, 2,54,032 claims have been granted including individual and CFRs.

SOME FLAWED CLAIMS

* Gauripur (Chamorshi): The village is inhabited by Bengali community. The applicants put up case for CFR in the application form though they are neither FDSTs nor OTFDs. Despite ineligibility, 2ha land was granted for fishing and 0.4ha for grazing

* Dawadi (Armori): The claim was for CFR on 227.76ha land. The ‘quantum’ or ‘extent’ claimed is mentioned. The processing at GS level does not establish anything in concrete. The document is signed by three official members only. There are, interestingly, three orders by the DLC.

* Murkuti (Korchi): The claimants asked for CFR on 122.84ha land. The forest rights committee (FRC) has not made any recommendation, but gram panchayat distributed the available area in panchayat’s jurisdiction among five villages