In an affidavit submitted to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) by the Madhya Pradesh government, it has been stated that people have encroached upon 5.46 lakh hectares of forest land. The NGT, taking suo moto cognizance of the encroachment on forest land, had sought this information from all states and union territories. The annual administrative report of the Forest Department for 2020-21 states that between 1980 and 1990, 1.19 lakh hectares of forest land were encroached upon. Subsequently, there was no encroachment between 1991-2000, 2001-2010, and 2011-2020.
The question arises whether 3.97 lakh hectares of forest land have been encroached upon between 2020 and 2025. The annual report of the Forest Department for 2020-21 also states that a total of 2.84 lakh hectares of forest land were diverted from 1980 to 2020. Out of this, 1.64 lakh hectares of forest land were diverted for irrigation, mining, defense, and various development projects. The highest diversion of 83,842 hectares of forest land was for irrigation projects. Madhya Pradesh witnessed the highest deforestation for various development projects between 2014 and 2024. In response to a question in Parliament, the Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Bhupendra Yadav, stated that 38,852 hectares of forest land were diverted for development projects in the state during this period. According to the India State of Forest Report 2023, the state has 85,72,400 hectares of forest land, which is a decrease of 61,240 hectares compared to the previous report.
The Ministry of Environment admitted before the Supreme Court in the Godavarman case in 2004 that "the record of rights did not exist, due to which the rights of tribals could not be settled during the forest consolidation process in the country." Therefore, rural people, especially tribals who have resided in the forests since time immemorial, were deprived of their traditional rights and livelihoods and became encroachers in the eyes of the law. The Government of India acknowledged that the historical injustice done to tribals should be rectified. Therefore, the Forest Rights Act 2006 pointed towards the historical injustice meted out to Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers, who are integral to the survival and sustainability of the forest ecosystem.1
According to January 2025 data under the Forest Rights Act 2006 in Madhya Pradesh, claims of possession over 5,85,326 individual forest land have been filed, out of which 3,18,425 claims have been rejected, which is the highest in the country. The Supreme Court's decision on February 13, 2019, regarding the Forest Rights Act revealed that 3,54,787 individual claims were rejected in Madhya Pradesh. The State Level Forest Rights Monitoring Committee, in its 17th meeting on February 27, 2019, acknowledged that proper procedures were not followed while rejecting the claims, and a decision was taken to review the claims. Following this, the forest rights of tribals in Madhya Pradesh are being violated through the Van Mitra app and portal. The state government designed the Van Mitra portal for the convenience of the tribal community; however, it is now becoming a cause of inconvenience for them. In the state, the portal is being used as a basis to deprive tribals of their rights. The provision is that possession of forest land should be before December 13, 2005. Tribals need to provide a caste certificate, and non-tribal communities need to prove their residency in the village for three generations.
Members of the Forest Rights Act Task Force Committee constituted by the state government had visited Simardha, a Baiga tribal-dominated forest village in the Samanapur development block of Dindori district, on the past April 26th. There, people reported that out of 72 individual claims filed, only 35 people received title deeds, and even those were incomplete. Such villages that were settled in the forests before 1932 and were included within these forests when they were declared "Reserved Forests" have a similar situation. The landholders residing in these villages were not given permanent leases for their land. Hundreds of such forest villages face the same situation. Claims of villages located in sanctuaries and tiger reserves are not being accepted at all, whereas the law states that if there is possession even in a reserve forest, a title deed will be given. Therefore, the extent of forest encroachment cannot be determined until the complete implementation of the Forest Rights Act and the settlement of all claims and reviews.
---
*Bargi Dam Displaced and Affected Association
Comments