Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Forest Act implementation poor in state: Report by Rakesh Lohumi

Forest Act implementation poor in state: Report by Rakesh Lohumi

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Nov 2, 2010   modified Modified on Nov 2, 2010

The joint committee on the Forest Rights Act (FRA) has termed the implementation of the Act in the state as extremely poor and recommended that it should be enforced in the state and not confined only to the tribal areas.

It is of the firm view that there should be no diversion of forest land till the FRA is enforced fully.

Disagreeing with the general perception on the part of the government that given the specific geographical condition it cannot be implemented in the whole of the state, it has asserted that 70 per cent population is eligible for benefits under the FRA by virtue of being dependent on forests for survival and livelihood needs. The government should issue the necessary orders for the implementation of the Act in the state with immediate effect to ensure that forest-dependent population is not denied its legitimate forest rights, the committee which visited the state recently for the purpose has stated in its report.

More importantly, it has recommended that an effective mechanism should be put in place to ensure that there is no diversion of forest land until the FRA is fully implemented. Proceedings in the high court and other courts or any authority orders regarding eviction of that occupying forest land should be put on hold. These orders were issued under the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, the Forest Conservation Act which had been superseded by the FRA.

The state government should promptly take a decision on the claims that have been received in the tribal areas and the criteria laid down regarding the eligibility of the beneficiaries should be withdrawn as it is a direct contravention of the provisions of the FRA and also delaying the process of recognition of forest rights in the tribal areas.

On the issue of ‘nautor’ lands, the FRA could be considered in case of poor families settled in forest land up to 20 bighas. It should be ensured that each village filed community claims as per the revenue records and any new use of forest resources. In case of failure to do so, the government should recognise the rights enlisted in the revenue records as the community rights under the FRA.

Special focus has to be laid on the filing of claims by groups of migratory graziers for which an inventory should be created, based on the data available with the forest department. The new timber distribution policy is against the spirit of the FRA and these rights should be now made a part of new Act.

The Forest Act 1927 should not be confused with land reform as it was passed by the British to annex Indian forests. The rights of locals were restricted and reduced to privileges and later on completely extinguished. After Independence more and more acquisition of gram sabha land, village forest, ‘nistar’ jungles and common property resources were acquired under the IFA.


The Tribune, 31 October, 2010, http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101101/himachal.htm#2


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close