Displaced from his village nestled inside the Madhav National Park in Shivpuri district two decades ago, Jadon Adivasi, 80, still nurses the hope of the promised two-hectare land that he could till, call his own, in another village.
“They can’t go back on the promise now. We survived on the hope of owning land for years; what other alternative do we have?” asks Mr. Adivasi, belonging to the particularly vulnerable Saharia tribe, trailing off.
Plan endorsed in 1999
The plan to allot agricultural land to 100 relocated tribal families of Balarpur village under the rehabilitation policy, endorsed in 1999 by the Congress government in the State of former Chief Minister Digvijaya Singh, approved by the Centre in 2000 and recognised by the Park’s authorities and the Madhya Pradesh Human Rights Commission in 2016, has been upended by the State’s Congress government now.
While back then 61 families, picked randomly first, got two acre agricultural land each, the remaining 39 awaited the allotment for 20 years only to be told they were ineligible. All the families were allotted a house and extended electricity and water supply though. “We depended on gathering forest produce inside the Park for years. But after relocation, we worked in stone mines and are now forced to migrate seasonally for agricultural labour,” said Mr. Adivasi.
In 2016, the Commission sought a report from the Park and district authorities on the delay in the allotment, to which the Director, recognising the pending allotment to the 39 families, replied the families meanwhile worked on fields of those with lands “of their own accord”, and would be allotted land on the Centre’s approval.
The allotment process was stalled when authorities belatedly noticed they had relocated families mistakenly on protected forest land instead of revenue. And diverting forest land for non-forests purposes violated the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The State government then sought the land’s denotifcation from the Centre, pending clearance till date.
Admitting the allotment was pending, V.K. Sharma, draftsman at the Park, on authorisation from the Director, said, “We’d sent the proposal to the Centre in 2002. Once denotified, the land would be allotted to the remaining families.”
District Collector Anugraha P., however, deviating from the policy, which considered every adult a separate family, claimed the 39 families were ineligible, and there was no question of land allotment. “Revenue officials have inquired into the claims and come up with a list of ineligible claimants. Either they were not residing in the relocated village at the time or were minors. We have videographed contestations to the list, and heard their claim and perused documents too. Even five years years ago, they were considered ineligible.”
Bhupendra Kushwah, Tehsildar, went further to say the families were declared ineligible in 2001-2002 itself when others were allotted land in Budi Barod village. “In November this year we organised two camps to look into claims, and it attested to this,” he said.
In 2017, the Commission directed the district administration to speedily complete the rehabilitation process, including those of the remaining 39 families, that the administration considers ineligible, and reiterate its request to the Centre to denotify the land. Sighting the delay, it ordered Rs. 3 lakh as compensation to each family.
Pointing to the impact of working in hazardous conditions in the absence of promised land and alternative occupations, it noted several male members were forced to work in stone mines. “Male breadwinners like this have died due to tuberculosis and other diseases because of working in mines,” it said, directing the government to pay a compensation of Rs. 2 lakh to each such affected family.
‘Right to livelihood’
“If the government considers them ineligible, why did the Park misinform the Commission they would get the land? And how did the district authorities inexplicably upturn a policy approved by the Centre?” asked Abhay Jain, of Zenith Legal Aid Clinic, supporting the families. “It has been 14 years since the Forest Rights Act was passed. The families have all the documents and can easily be allotted land. It’s a question of their right to livelihood and life.”
