Himachal forest department withdraws controversial circular on Forest Rights Act after public backlash

Kullu: Himachal Pradesh's forest department has withdrawn a controversial circular on the enforcement of Forest Rights Act, 2006, following sharp criticism from rights activists, environmentalists, and local residents. The circular was issued by principal chief conservator of forests (PCCF) Sameer Rastogi, who heads the forest department, to the deputy commissioners of all 12 districts and forest officials, asking them to exercise "utmost caution while accepting claims under the FRA Act, 2006".
In the detailed circular, PCCF had said that in order to protect the forest wealth and provide benefits to real beneficiaries, it was important to exclude encroachers during the implementation of FRA. The circular stated that encroachments, including apple orchards on forest land, cannot be deemed as forest-based livelihood as these are high-profit ventures set up after the destruction of forests.
While advocating that only those claims which are genuine and from landless and marginalised people who depend upon forest land for their livelihoods should be accepted, the PCCF had also told officials in the circular that the FRA should not become a means of regularising unlawful occupation or encroachments by those who are economically secure or influential. The circular, issued on April 11, triggered a wave of criticism, forcing the department to withdraw it five days later on April 16.
Terming the circular as against the spirit of the FRA, activists lashed out against the forest officials for trying to create hurdles in the enforcement of the Act in Himachal Pradesh. "The forest department officials are not even supposed to issue such a circular as it's against the spirit of the Act. If an advisory is to be issued, only the chief secretary, who heads the state-level monitoring committee (SLMC), formed under the Act, can do that," said Sandeep Minhas, state secretary of Himalaya Niti Abhiyan, an environmental NGO, which has been helping forest dwellers file their claims on lands they are dependent upon in various parts of the state.
Minhas said the FRA was being deliberately misinterpreted by the forest officials. "This circular talks about forest encroachments in the form of apple orchards but the FRA allows horticulture activities upon forest land. The letter says that only the landless or marginalised should receive benefits, but the FRA doesn't talk about landless or marginalised and only about the scheduled tribes (ST) and other traditional forest dwellers (OTFD), who can claim a right on forest land. The forest department through this circular has tried to mislead and even change the definition of a forest dweller as enshrined in the Act to keep a large section of people out of the ambit of the Act," said Minhas.
According to Guman Singh, coordinator of Himalaya Niti Abhiyan, the circular shows that the forest department hasn't been able to free itself from the colonial mindset. "Unlike other departments like agriculture or horticulture which help the farmers and fruit growers, the forest department falsely believes that it owns the forests of the state. It's a colonial mindset. The forest department is afraid of giving forests back to the communities. The forest officials fear the FRA because its enforcement in the state will give a bigger role to communities in forest conservation," said Singh.
PCCF in the circular also referred to a pending case on FRA in the Supreme Court while warning that any violation may invite contempt of court. However, politician and former Rajya Sabha member Brinda Karat countered this reference, saying that there are no guidelines issued by the SC in the said case. Expressing serious concern and terming the circular as ‘outrageous', Karat in a letter asked Himachal Pradesh chief minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu to take action against Rastogi for "the misleading circular".
"A fresh petition has been filed in the Supreme Court by a so-called environmental group against the Act. The reference to this case in the circular is misleading if not a blatant untruth because there are no guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in the said case," the letter stated. Introduced in 2006, the Forest Rights Act, which recognises the rights of forest-dwelling communities over land and forest resources and provides land ownership to scheduled tribes and other forest dwellers, is still to be properly enforced in Himachal Pradesh.
The present state govt recently launched a campaign to verify and accept claims over forest land put up by the communities under the FRA. A number of workshops to raise awareness on how to file claims have also been organised recently in various parts of the state and attended personally by revenue minister Jagat Singh Negi, who is overseeing the FRA implementation. According to Himalaya Niti Abhiyan, over 1,000 claims over forest land have been received in recent months from Kullu, Kinnaur, and Lahaul Spiti districts.
Who has the right over forest land under FRA, 2006?
There are two categories who can claim ownership over forest land they have been traditionally dependent upon for their livelihood. First, the people belonging to the scheduled tribes (STs), who have been living and are dependent upon forest land prior to Dec 13, 2005. Second, forest dwellers, who have been living in forest areas for at least three generations before Dec 13, 2005, and depend upon forests for their livelihood. Forest dwellers can claim right over land they have been cultivating for up to four hectares. According to the Act, forest dwellers who have been illegally evicted or displaced from forest land before Dec 13, 2005, can also claim their right over the forest land.
How FRA empowers communities
Forest dwellers can claim ownership of land they have been traditionally cultivating. Forest dwellers can use minor forest produce like honey, herbs, medicinal plants, roots, etc. Communities can manage and protect forests, wildlife, and biodiversity. Gram sabha, formed under the Act, can approve forest land right claims and no govt decision can override gram sabha decision without its consent.