URKUND

Urkund Analysis Result

Analysed Document: Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)
Submitted: 4/8/2019 4:58:00 PM
Submitted By: shivampatel.ug@nliu.ac.in
Significance: 27 %

Sources included in the report:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scheduled_Tribes_and_Other_Traditional_Forest_Dwellers_
(Recognition_of_Forest_Rights)_Act,_2006
http://www.hillpublisher.com/UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=108222
http://fra.org.in/about.htm
http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-scrutiny-32957
http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/

Instances where selected sources appear:

10
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

Page | 1 NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY BHOPAL A PROJECT ON “SOCIOLOGICAL

ANALYSIS OF FOREST RIGHTS ACT” THIRD TRIMESTER SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY: Prof.
(Dr.) TAPAN R. MOHANTY RONAK PATIDAR 2018BALLB93 SHIVAM PATEL 2018BALLB86

Page | 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My vocabulary falls short on words to express my hearty

gratitude towards our Sociology of Law professor (Dr.) Tapan R. Mohanty sir who gave us the
opportunity to work on a legislature we haven’t studied yet and thus it helped gain some extra
knowledge of the forest rights act. Also, I’d like to thank the prestigious library of NLIU with
the material (books) of which I was able to supplement my project work. I want to take out this
moment to lastly (but certainly not the least) thank my and The Almighty under whose
blessings I was able to conclude this project work. I acknowledge the support of all the
aforesaid and now start with my project. Thank You.

Page | 3 OBJECTIVES • To understand the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest
Dwellers Act, 2006 with respect to the social changes in the society.

Page | 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS OBJECTIVES

....................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND
.................................................................. 5 FOREST RIGHTS
................................................................................................ 7 WHO IS ENTITLED TO SUCH RIGHTS?
......................................................... 9 WHY IS THIS ACT NECESSARY? ,
................................................................... 9 DRAWBACKS OF THIS ACT
.......................................................................... 11 BENEFITS TO THE TRIBALS
......................................................................... 13 CONCLUSION
................................................................................................... 14 REFERENCES
.................................................................................................... 15

Page | 5 INTRODUCTION : BACKGROUND

The

Forest Rights Act or

the “

0: http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=108222 78%

Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act,
2006 [

No. 2 of 2007]

was

an act to recognise and vest the forest rights and occupation in

forest

2
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

land in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers

who have been

residing in such forests for generations

but whose rights could not be recorded;

to provide for a framework for recording the forest rights so vested and the nature of
evidence required for such recognition and vesting in respect

0: http://fra.org.in/about.htm 97%

of forest land. 1

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights)
Act, 2006 (“

The

Act”)

is a

result of the protracted struggle by the marginal and tribal communities of our country to
assert their rights over the forestland over which they were traditionally dependent. This Act
is crucial to the rights of millions of tribals and other forest dwellers in different parts of our
country as it provides for the restitution of deprived forest rights across India, including both
individual rights to cultivated land in forestland and community rights over common
property resources.

The

notification of Rules for the implementation of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 on 1st Jan 2008,

has finally paved the way to undo the ‘historic injustice’ done to the tribals and other forest
dwellers. 2 The livelihood of perhaps 100 million poorest of the poor (The Indian Forest
Rights Act 2006: Communing Enclosures) stands to improve if implementation can succeed.
The Act is significant as it provides scope and historic opportunity of integrating conservation
and livelihood rights of the people. 3

Forest biodiversity and resources have supported the livelihoods and lives of forest dependent
people in India for thousands of years. Animals and plants have been worshipped and play a
central role in various cultures and traditions. Forests, rivers, mountains and lakes have been
seen as the abode of gods. Many Indian communities have protected forest patches dedicated
1

3
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

0: http://www.hillpublisher.com/UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf 90%

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights)
Act, 2006 [

No. 02 of 2007] 2

http://fra.org.in/about.htm; last visited on: 10-04-2016 at 23:58:12 hours 3 Ibid.

Page | 6 to deities and ancestral spirits as sacred groves. Even today many sacred groves still
provide a refuge to several endangered and threatened species of flora and fauna. 4

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
The_Scheduled_Tribes_and_Other_Traditional_Forest_Dwellers_
(Recognition_of_Forest_Rights)_Act,_2006 100%

Supporters of the Act claim that it will redress the "historical injustice" committed against
forest dwellers, while including provisions for making conservation more effective and more
transparent. The demand for the law has seen massive national

demonstrations involving hundreds of thousands of people. 5 4

https://socialissuesindia.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/appraisal_forest_rights_act_2006.pdf;
last visited on 11-04-2016 at 00:06:30 hours 5 Ibid.

Page | 7 FOREST RIGHTS The iScheduled iTribes iand iother itraditional iforest idwellers, ion
iall iforest ilands, ifollowing irights ihave ibeen iconferred iby ivirtue iof iSection i3(1) iof iThe
iAct 67 . 1. Right ito ihold iand ilive iin ithe iforest iland iunder ithe iindividual ior icommon
ioccupation ifor ihabitation ior ifor iself-cultivation ifor ilivelihood iby ia imember ior imembers
iof ia iforest idwelling iScheduled iTribe ior iother itraditional iforest idwellers; 2. Community
irights isuch ias inistar, iby iwhatever iname icalled, iincluding ithose iused iin ierstwhile
iPrincely istates, iZamindari ior isuch iintermediary iregimes; 3. Right iof iownership, iaccess
ito icollect, iuse, iand idispose iof iminor iforest iproduce( iincludes iall inon-timber iforest
iproduce iof iplant iorigin) iwhich ihas ibeen itraditionally icollected iwithin ior ioutside ivillage
iboundaries; 4. Other icommunity irights iof iuses iof ientitlements isuch ias ifish iand iother
iproducts iof iwater ibodies, igrazing i(both isettled ior itranshumant) iand itraditional
iseasonal iresource iaccess iof inomadic ior ipastoralist icommunities; 5. Rights iincluding
icommunity itenures iof ihabitat iand ihabitation ifor iprimitive itribal igroups iand ipre-
agriculture icommunities; 6. Rights iin ior iover idisputed ilands iunder iany inomenclature iin
iany iState iwhere iclaims iare idisputed; 7. Rights ifor iconversion iof iPattas ior ileases ior
igrants iissued iby iany ilocal icouncil ior iany iState iGovt. ion iforest ilands ito ititles; 8. Rights
iof isettlement iand iconversion iof iall iforest ivillages, iold ihabitation, iunsurveyed ivillages
iand iother ivillages iin iforest, iwhether irecorded, inotified ior inot iinto irevenue ivillages; 9.
Right ito iprotect, iregenerate ior iconserve ior imanage iany icommunity iforest iresource
iwhich ithey ihave ibeen itraditionally iprotecting iand iconserving ifor isustainable iuse; 10.

4
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

Rights iwhich iare irecognised iunder iany iState ilaw ior ilaws iof iany iAutonomous iDist.
iCouncil ior iAutonomous iRegional iCouncil ior iwhich iare iaccepted ias irights 6 http://
tribal.nic.in/actTA06.pdf; last visited on 11-04-2016 at 1:05:43 hours 7

0: http://www.hillpublisher.com/UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf 90%

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights)
Act, 2006 [

No. 02 of 2007]

Page | 8 iof itribals iunder iany itraditional ior icustomary ilaw iof ithe iconcerned itribes iof
iany iState; 11. Right iof iaccess ito ibiodiversity iand icommunity iright ito iintellectual
iproperty iand itraditional iknowledge irelated ito ibiodiversity iand icultural idiversity; 12. Any
iother itraditional iright icustomarily ienjoyed iby ithe iforest idwelling iScheduled iTribes ior
iother itraditional iforest idwellers, ias ithe icase imay ibe, iwhich iare inot imentioned iin
iclauses-1 ito i11, ibut iexcluding ithe itraditional iright iof ihunting ior itrapping iextracting ia
ipart iof ithe ibody iof iany ispecies iof iwild ianimal. It iis ialso isaid iin ithe isame iact ithat ithe
icentral igovernment ishall iprovide ifor idiversion iof iforest iland ifor ithe ifollowing ifacilities
ibut iit ishall inot iinclude ifalling iof itrees inot iexceeding iseventy ifive itrees iper ihectare:
iSchools; idispensary ior ihospital; ianganwadis; ifair iprice ishops; ielectric iand
itelecommunication ilines; itanks iand iother iminor iwater ibodies; idrinking iwater isupply
iand iwater ibodies; idrinking iwater isupply iand iwater ipipelines; iwater ior irain iwater
iharvesting istructures; iminor iirrigation icanals; inon-conventional isource iof ienergy; iskill
iupgradation ior ivocational itraining icentres; iroads; iand icommunity icentres. 8 This
idiversion ishall ibe iallowed ionly iif,- i (i) The iforest iland ito ibe idiverted ifor ithe ipurposes
imentioned iin ithis isub isection iis iless ithan ione ihectare iin ieach icase; iand (ii) The
iclearance iof isuch idevelopmental iprojects ishall ibe isubject ito ithe icondition ithat ithe
isame iis irecommended iby ithe iGram iSabha. 9 8 Ibid. 9 http://fra.org.in/laws/fra06.pdf; last
visited on 11-04-2016 at 02:36:11 hours

Page | 9 WHO i IS i ENTITLED i TO i SUCH i RIGHTS? The irights ienshrined iin iThe iAct iare
ivested iin ithe iforest idwelling iScheduled iTribes iin iareas iwhere ithey ihave ibeen ideclared
ias iScheduled iTribes iand ithe iother itraditional iforest idwellers. iThe iforest irights
irecognised iunder ithis iAct iin icritical iwildlife ihabitats iof iNational iParks iand iSanctuaries
imay ibe isubsequently imodified ior iresettled, ino iforest iright iholders ishall ibe iresettled
ior ihave itheir irights iaffected ifor ithe ipurpose iof icreating iinviolate iareas ifor iwildlife
iconservation iexcept iin icase iwhere iall ithe isaid ielements iviz. iAll iother ioptions ihave
ibeen iconsidered ibut iwere iin ivain, iresettlement ipackages ito iprovide ia isecure ilivelihood
iand ino iresettlement ishall itake iplace iuntil ifacilities iare icomplete ias ipromised. 10 i WHY i
IS i THIS i ACT i NECESSARY? What iare icalled i"forests" iin iIndian ilaw ioften ihave inothing ito
ido iwith iactual iforests. iUnder ithe iIndian iForest iAct, iareas iwere ioften ideclared ito ibe
i"government iforests" iwithout irecording iwho ilived iin ithese iareas, iwhat iland ithey iwere
iusing, iwhat iuses ithey imade iof ithe iforest i/ iland i- iand ioften iwithout isurveying
iwhether iit iwas iforest iat iall. i82% iof iMadhya iPradesh's iforest iblocks, i20% iof iAP's

5
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

igovernment iforests iand i40% iof iOrissa's ireserved iforests ihave inever ibeen isurveyed.
iSimilarly i60% iof iIndia's inational iparks ihave itill itoday i(sometimes iafter i25 iyears, ias iin
iSariska) inot icompleted itheir iprocess iof ienquiry iand isettlement iof irights. iAs ia iresult
imillions iof ipeople iare isubject ito iharassment, ievictions, ietc, ion ithe ipretext iof ibeing
iencroachers iin itheir iown ihomes. iIn ithe ilatest inational ieviction idrive ifrom i2002
ionwards, imore ithan i3, i00,000 ifamilies iwere idriven iinto idestitution iand istarvation. iIn
iMadhya iPradesh ialone, imore ithan i125 ivillages ihave ibeen iburned ito ithe iground. iAs
ithe iGovernment iof iIndia's iTiger iTask iForce iput iit, i"In ithe iname iof iconservation, iwhat
ihas ibeen icarried iout iis ia icompletely iillegal iand iunconstitutional iland iacquisition
iprogramme." 10 http://forestrightsact.awardspace.com/myths.htm#mozTocId600030; last
visited on 11-04-2016 at 07:45:14 hours

Page | 10 The iAct itries ito iend ithis iby iensuring ithat ithe irights iof iforest idwellers ito ithe
iland, iminor iforest iproduce, icommunity iresources ietc. ithat ithey iare iusing iare irecorded
iand igiven ilegal isanction. The iAct iwas iopposed ivehemently iinitially ifor ithe ireason ithat
iit iwill ideteriorate ithe icondition iof iIndia’s iforests. i“This iis idespite ithe ifact ithat iover
i60% iof ithe icountry’s iforest icover iis ifound iin i187 itribal idistricts iwhere iless ithan i8% iof
inational ipopulation ilives. iThis ireflects ithe iculture iof ithe itribals ito iconserve iforest.” 11
The iForest iRights iAct, i2006 ibasically idoes itwo ithings: • iGrants ilegal irecognition ito ithe
irights iof itraditional iforest idwelling icommunities, ipartially icorrecting ithe iinjustice
icaused iby ithe iforest ilaws. i • iMakes ia ibeginning itowards igiving icommunities iand ithe
ipublic ia ivoice iin iforest iand iwildlife iconservation. The iScheduled iTribes iand iOther
iTraditional iForest iDwellers i(Recognition iof iForest iRights) iAct, i2006 i(or isimply i“the
iForest iRights iAct”), icame iinto iforce ion ithe i31 iDecember i2007, iwith ithe iobjective iof
irecognizing iand ivesting ithe iforest irights iin iforest idwelling iScheduled iTribes iand iother
itraditional iforest idwellers iwho ihave ibeen iliving iin iforests ifor igenerations ibut iwhose
irights ihave ionly ibeen irespected ithrough iviolation. iIt ihas ialso ibeen icalled ithe iForest
iRights iAct, ithe iForest iDwellers iAct, ithe iTribal iRights iAct, ithe iTribal iBill, iand ithe iTribal
iLand iAct. iThe ilaw iconcerns ithe irights iof iforest-dwelling icommunities ito iland iand
iother iresources, idenied ito ithem iover idecades ias ia iresult iof ithe icontinuance iof
icolonial iforest ilaws iin iIndia. 12 11

0: http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/ 97%

AIPTN (2006), Indigenous Issues: INDIA’S FOREST RIGHTS ACT OF 2006: Illusion or solution?
[Online: web] Accessed 11-4-16, URL:http://www.aitpn.org/Issues/II-09-06-Forest.pdf 12

https://socialissuesindia.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/appraisal_forest_rights_act_2006.pdf;
last visited on 11-04-2016 at 14:08:33 hours

Page | 11 DRAWBACKS i OF i THIS i ACT This iis ian ianti-development ilaw idrafted ientirely iby
iNGOs iwho iromanticise ithe ilives iof ipoor itribals. iThe isection i3(2) iallows ia iroad iin ionly
i“one ihectare” iof iland, ior ia icanal, ifor ithat imatter iwhich iis iridiculous. iAnd ieven ithis
ineeds ia igram isabha ito inod iin iunison. 13 By ienacting ia iseparate ilaw ifor itribals, iwe
iare ieffectively isaying ithe ifollowing: One, itribals iare inot ione iof ius. iThey iare inot

6
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

iordinary icitizens iwith ithe isame irights ias iother iIndians. iNormal ilaws iare inot ienough
ito iprotect itheir irights. Two, itribals iare ilike iendangered ispecies, iand ithe iFRA iis
iintended ito icreate ilarge itiger ireserves ifor ihumans ilabelled itribals. iBut itribal
iproportions iare iactually irising iin iIndia, iwith itheir itotal iin iIndia’s ipopulation irising ifrom
i8.2 ipercent iin i2001 ito i8.6 ipercent iin i2011. Three, ithe icommunity ihas ito ibe iprivileged
iover ithe iindividual i– isince iit iis inot iindividuals iwho ihave irights ito iland ior ilivelihoods,
ibut ithe icommunity. iThis iis ifundamentally iagainst ithe iconstitutional ischeme iof ithings.
iConsider ihow isilly iit iwould ibe iif iwe iwere ito ienact ia iJat iRights iAct ias ithough iJats iare
inot iindividuals, ibut ia icollective ientity ionly. iBut iwe iare idoing ithis ifor itribals. 14 Saxena
ipanel ihighlights iproblems iin iimplementation; iNAC ihas iconcrete isuggestions

0: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-scrutiny-32957 100%

Issues i of i contention Recommendations i of i NFRAC NAC’s i recommendations Gram i

sabha i is i formed i at i panchayat i level. i This i makes i it i difficult i to i recognise i
community i rights Constitute i gram i sabhas i at i hamlet i or i revenue i village i level The i
government i should i accept i village i self- rule i as i mentioned i by i Panchayat i Extension i
to i Scheduled i Areas i (PESA) i Act i in i all i villages 13

http://www.firstpost.com/india/the-forest-rights-act-needs-to-go-tribals-arent-part-of-a-tiger-
reserve- 1707317.html; last visited on 11-04-2016 at 14:21:11 hours 14 Ibid.

Page | 12

0: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-scrutiny-32957 99%

People’s i participation i in i the i process i of i recognition i of i rights i is i not i followed i for i

which i claims i are i often i wrongly i rejected i or i modified. i Even i if i claims i are i
accepted, i rights i certificates i are i not i recorded Civil i society i groups i should i be i
involved i at i all i levels i of i implementation. i Tribal i affairs i ministry i should i clarify i that i
the i rights i certificates i issued i should i be i recorded i in i settlement i records i and i the i
land i with i individual i rights i be i treated i as i private i land. i It i must- i clarify i if i it i
should i be i converted i to i revenue i land Forest i officials’ i consent i isn’t i needed i to i
accept i claim. i Higher i committees i should i not i reject i a i claim i or i modify i it i unless i
an i appeal i is i filed i against i it. i In i case i of i insufficient i evidence, i claims i should i be i
remanded i to i gram i sabha. i Lands i rights i be i recorded i and i converted i to i revenue i
land Right i to i protect i and i manage i community i forest i resources i have i hardly i been i
implemented; i the i right i is i not i even i mentioned i in i many i states The i village i and i
government i can i have i a i flexible i arrangement i of i sharing i authority i over i forest i
resources i as i an i interim i measure. i Gradually i the i forest i department i should i walk i
out i and i communities i should i take i over Villages i should i be i presumed i to i have i
community i forest i resource i and i hence i rights i over i them. i Failure i to i recognise i this
i be i explained. i Forest i department i should i respect i gram i sabha’s i powers. i Confusing i
marginal i note i in i the i Act i that i limits i forest i rights i to i areas i where i the i rights i are
i recognised i be i removed Joint i Forest i Management In i areas i where i the i claim i of i a i

7
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

community i to i manage i its i forest i resources i has i been i accepted i JFM i committees i
should i be i dissolved. i If i claims i are i not i accepted, i JFM i should i work i under i gram i
sabha JFM i should i be i replaced i with i Community i Forest i Management i under i the i Act.
i Funds i for i forestry i should i be i channelled i through i National i Rural i Employment i
Guarantee i scheme Rights i over i MFP i are i not i recognised i in i most i areas. i The i right i
is i not i even i mentioned i in i the i claim i form i in i many State i governments i should i
stop i subsidising i MFP i to i industries, i and i de-regularise i all i MFPs, i except i tendu i
leaves. i Governments i should i announce i minimum i support i price A i rule i should i be i
introduced i giving i collectors i the i freedom i to i sell i and i transport i MFP, i subject i to i
regulation i by i the i gram i sabha. i State i procurement i agencies i should i be i mandated i
to i provide

Page | 13 i states i (MSP) i for i MFPs i MSP 15 BENEFITS i TO i THE i TRIBALS The iposition iwith
iregard ito inumber iof ititles idistributed ito iforest idwelling iScheduled iTribes/Other
iTraditional iForest iDwellers iunder iScheduled iTribes iand iOther iTraditional iForest
iDwellers i(Recognition iof iForest iRights) iAct i2006 i(FRA) iduring ithe iyears i2012, i2013,
i2014 iand i2015 iis ias iunder: i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i2012 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i i i i i i i i12,79,076 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i2013 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
i i14,18,078 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i2014 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
15,56,676 2015 i i i i i i i i i(as i ion iApril i30, i2015) i i i i i i i16,85,907 As iper iFRA ithe
iresponsibility ifor iimplementation iof ithe iAct ilies iwith ithe irespective iState iGovernments.
iThe iGovernment iof iIndia ihas idecided ito iimplement iFRA iin ia i“campaign imode” iand
iStates ihave ibeen igiven idetailed iadvisory ito icomplete ithe iprocess iof irecognition iand
ivesting iof iforest irights iin ia itime ibound imanner. i iHowever, idifferent iStates iare iat
idifferent istages iof iprogress, ino ideadline ihas ibeen iprescribed. Only ithose imembers iof
iScheduled iTribes iare ivested iwith iforest irights iwho iare ifound ieligible ias iper ithe
iprovisions iof iFRA iand iForest iRights iRules i2007 i(and iamended iRules i2012). i iAny
iperson iaggrieved iby ithe iresolution iof iGram iSabha imay iprefer ia ipetition ito ithe iSub-
Divisional iLevel iCommittee iand isimilarly, iany iperson iaggrieved 15 http://
www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-scrutiny-32957; last visited on
11-04-2016 at 14:40:22 hours

Page | 14 iby ithe idecision iof iSub iDivisional iLevel iCommittee imay iprefer ia ipetition ito
ithe iDistrict iLevel iCommittee isubject ito ithe iconditions ilaid idown iunder iFRA. i
iTherefore, icases iof idenial iof irights, iif iany, ido inot icome ito ithe ilevel iof iCentral
iMinistry.

Page | 15 CONCLUSION A holistic view of the act makes it clear that the act is much more than
just individual rights of tenure. The Act provides for the recognition of 13 types of forest rights
(individual as well as community rights) and also prescribes duties and empowers the forest
right holders, Gram Sabhas, and local level institutions with regard to protection of wildlife,
forests, bio-diversity, habitat and cultural and natural heritage. The Act needs to be presented
in this view so that the twin aspects of rights and duties can be viewed holistically which is the
principle behind the act. Another problem is the issue of the Forest Rights Act being seen as a
white wash legislation that will like a magic wand set right the historic injustices of the

8
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

indigenous people inhabiting the forest lands. The act is just another step in achieving
equality for the marginalized sections of Indian society - that is the forest dwellers. It is a
major step no doubt but it alone cannot set all records straight. There is a need therefore for
inclusive development which takes into account other problems of the forest dwellers. The
ultimate aim should be community based management of forests and not merely
bureaucratic control of our forestry. They need to be provided with better health and
sanitation, vocational facilities, their right to harvest minor forest produce which can
guarantee them security of livelihood. All this will go a long way in ensuring that they can lead
a happy and fulfilling life. Such programmes need to be run inclusive with the provisions of
the Forest Rights Act in order to make a meaningful and positive impact in uplifting the
conditions of the traditional forest dwellers. Thus we can see that though tribals are less
aware of their rights and the act does not have a very huge impact on the problems but as we
say it- “slow and steady...” the act is another step towards equality.

Page | 16 REFERENCES •

0: http://www.hillpublisher.com/UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf 90%

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights)
Act, 2006 [

No. 02 of 2007] •

http://fra.org.in/about.htm • https://socialissuesindia.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/
appraisal_forest_rights_act_2006.p df • http://tribal.nic.in/actTA06.pdf • http://
www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-scrutiny-32957 • http://
www.firstpost.com/india/the-forest-rights-act-needs-to-go-tribals-arent-part-of-a- tiger-
reserve-1707317.html •

0: http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/ 90%

AIPTN (2006), Indigenous Issues: INDIA’S FOREST RIGHTS ACT OF 2006: Illusion or solution?,
URL:http://www.aitpn.org/Issues/II-09-06-Forest.pdf •

https://socialissuesindia.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/appraisal_forest_rights_act_2006.p df •
http://forestrightsact.awardspace.com/myths.htm#mozTocId600030; last visited on 11-
04-2016 at 07:45:14 hours. • http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/

9
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

Hit and source - focused comparison, Side by Side:

Left side: As student entered the text in the submitted document.

Right side: As the text appears in the source.

Instances from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scheduled_Tribes_and_Other_Traditional_Forest_Dwellers_(Recognition_of_Forest_Rights)

_Act,_2006

4 100%
Supporters of the Act claim that it will redress the "historical
injustice" committed against forest dwellers, while including
provisions for making conservation more effective and more
transparent. The demand for the law has seen massive national
demonstrations involving hundreds of thousands of people. 5 4
4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
The_Scheduled_Tribes_and_Other_Traditional_Forest_Dwellers_
(Recognition_of_Forest_Rights)_Act,_2006 100%
Supporters of the Act claim that it will redress the "historical
injustice" committed against forest dwellers, while including
provisions for making conservation more effective and more
transparent. The demand for the law has seen massive national
demonstrations involving hundreds of thousands of people.[1]

10
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

Instances from: http://www.hillpublisher.com/UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf

3 90% 3: http://www.hillpublisher.com/
UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf 90%
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 [ the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 3.1. Lack of
No. 02 of 2007] 2

5 90% 5: http://www.hillpublisher.com/
UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf 90%
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 [ the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 3.1. Lack of
No. 02 of 2007]

9 90% 9: http://www.hillpublisher.com/
UpFile/201804/2018042567432697.pdf 90%
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 [ the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 3.1. Lack of
No. 02 of 2007] •

11
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

Instances from: http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=108222

1 78% 1: http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=108222 78%

Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 [
No. 2 of 2007]
was
an act to recognise and vest the forest rights and occupation in
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, has been enacted to
recognize and vest the forest rights and occupation of forest
land in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional
forest dwellers, who have been residing in such forests for
generations, but whose rights could not be recorded.

forest

land in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional

forest dwellers

who have been

residing in such forests for generations

but whose rights could not be recorded;

12
URKUND
Instances from: http://fra.org.in/about.htm
2 97%
of forest land. 1
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (“
The
Act”)
is a
result of the protracted struggle by the marginal and tribal
communities of our country to assert their rights over the
forestland over which they were traditionally dependent. This Act
is crucial to the rights of millions of tribals and other forest
dwellers in different parts of our country as it provides for the
restitution of deprived forest rights across India, including both
individual rights to cultivated land in forestland and community
rights over common property resources.
The
notification of Rules for the implementation of the Forest Rights
Act, 2006 on 1st Jan 2008,
has finally paved the way to undo the ‘historic injustice’ done to
the tribals and other forest dwellers. 2 The livelihood of perhaps
13
Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)
2: http://fra.org.in/about.htm 97%
OF
FOREST RIGHTS) ACT, 2006
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
is a result of the protracted struggle by the marginal and tribal
communities of our country to assert their rights over the
forestland over which they were traditionally dependent. This Act
is crucial to the rights of millions of tribals and other forest
dwellers in different parts of our country as it provides for the
restitution of deprived forest rights across India, including both
individual rights to cultivated land in forestland and community
rights over common property resources. The notification of
Rules for the implementation of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 on
1st Jan 2008, has finally paved the way to undo the ‘historic
injustice’ done to the tribals and other forest dwellers. The
livelihood of perhaps 100 million poorest of the poor (The Indian
Forest Rights Act 2006: Communing Enclosures) stands to
improve if implementation can succeed. The Act is significant as
it provides scope and historic opportunity of integrating
conservation and livelihood rights of the people.
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

100 million poorest of the poor (The Indian Forest Rights Act
2006: Communing Enclosures) stands to improve if
implementation can succeed. The Act is significant as it provides
scope and historic opportunity of integrating conservation and
livelihood rights of the people. 3

14
URKUND
Instances from: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-scrutiny-32957
7 100%
Issues i of i contention Recommendations i of i NFRAC NAC’s i
recommendations Gram i sabha i is i formed i at i panchayat i
level. i This i makes i it i difficult i to i recognise i community i
rights Constitute i gram i sabhas i at i hamlet i or i revenue i
village i level The i government i should i accept i village i self-
rule i as i mentioned i by i Panchayat i Extension i to i Scheduled i
Areas i (PESA) i Act i in i all i villages 13
8 99%
People’s i participation i in i the i process i of i recognition i of i
rights i is i not i followed i for i which i claims i are i often i
wrongly i rejected i or i modified. i Even i if i claims i are i
accepted, i rights i certificates i are i not i recorded Civil i society i
groups i should i be i involved i at i all i levels i of i
implementation. i Tribal i affairs i ministry i should i clarify i that i
the i rights i certificates i issued i should i be i recorded i in i
settlement i records i and i the i land i with i individual i rights i
be i treated i as i private i land. i It i must- i clarify i if i it i should i
be i converted i to i revenue i land Forest i officials’ i consent i
isn’t i needed i to i accept i claim. i Higher i committees i should i
not i reject i a i claim i or i modify i it i unless i an i appeal i is i
filed i against i it. i In i case i of i insufficient i evidence, i claims i
should i be i remanded i to i gram i sabha. i Lands i rights i be i
15
Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)
7: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-
scrutiny-32957 100%
Issues of contention Recommendations of NFRAC NAC’s
recommendations Gram sabha is formed at panchayat level. This
makes it difficult to recognise community rights Constitute gram
sabhas at hamlet or revenue village level The government
should accept village self-rule as mentioned by Panchayat
Extension to Scheduled Areas (PESA) Act in all villages
8: http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forest-rights-act-under-
scrutiny-32957 99%
People’s participation in the process of recognition of rights is
not followed for which claims are often wrongly rejected or
modified. Even if claims are accepted, rights certificates are not
recorded Civil society groups should be involved at all levels of
implementation. Tribal affairs ministry should clarify that the
rights certificates issued should be recorded in settlement
records and the land with individual rights be treated as private
land. It must- clarify if it should be converted to revenue land
Forest officials’ consent isn’t needed to accept claim. Higher
committees should not reject a claim or modify it unless an
appeal is filed against it. In case of insufficient evidence, claims
should be remanded to gram sabha. Lands rights be recorded
and converted to revenue land Right to protect and manage
URKUND
recorded i and i converted i to i revenue i land Right i to i protect
i and i manage i community i forest i resources i have i hardly i
been i implemented; i the i right i is i not i even i mentioned i in i
many i states The i village i and i government i can i have i a i
flexible i arrangement i of i sharing i authority i over i forest i
resources i as i an i interim i measure. i Gradually i the i forest i
department i should i walk i out i and i communities i should i
take i over Villages i should i be i presumed i to i have i
community i forest i resource i and i hence i rights i over i them. i
Failure i to i recognise i this i be i explained. i Forest i department
i should i respect i gram i sabha’s i powers. i Confusing i
marginal i note i in i the i Act i that i limits i forest i rights i to i
areas i where i the i rights i are i recognised i be i removed Joint i
Forest i Management In i areas i where i the i claim i of i a i
community i to i manage i its i forest i resources i has i been i
accepted i JFM i committees i should i be i dissolved. i If i claims i
are i not i accepted, i JFM i should i work i under i gram i sabha
JFM i should i be i replaced i with i Community i Forest i
Management i under i the i Act. i Funds i for i forestry i should i
be i channelled i through i National i Rural i Employment i
Guarantee i scheme Rights i over i MFP i are i not i recognised i
in i most i areas. i The i right i is i not i even i mentioned i in i the i
claim i form i in i many State i governments i should i stop i
subsidising i MFP i to i industries, i and i de-regularise i all i MFPs,
i except i tendu i leaves. i Governments i should i announce i
minimum i support i price A i rule i should i be i introduced i
giving i collectors i the i freedom i to i sell i and i transport i MFP,
16
Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)
community forest resources have hardly been implemented; the
right is not even mentioned in many states The village and
government can have a flexible arrangement of sharing
authority over forest resources as an interim measure. Gradually
the forest department should walk out and communities should
take over Villages should be presumed to have community forest
resource and hence rights over them. Failure to recognise this
be explained. Forest department should respect gram sabha’s
powers. Confusing marginal note in the Act that limits forest
rights to areas where the rights are recognised be removed Joint
Forest Management In areas where the claim of a community to
manage its forest resources has been accepted JFM committees
should be dissolved. If claims are not accepted, JFM should work
under gram sabha JFM should be replaced with Community
Forest Management under the Act. Funds for forestry should be
channelled through National Rural Employment Guarantee
scheme Rights over MFP are not recognised in most areas. The
right is not even mentioned in the claim form in many states
State governments should stop subsidising MFP to industries,
and de-regularise all MFPs, except tendu leaves. Governments
should announce minimum support price (MSP) for MFPs A rule
should be introduced giving collectors the freedom to sell and
transport MFP, subject to regulation by the gram sabha. State
procurement agencies should be mandated to provide
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

i subject i to i regulation i by i the i gram i sabha. i State i

procurement i agencies i should i be i mandated i to i provide

17
URKUND Sociology of Law.pdf (D50367684)

Instances from: http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/

6 97% 6: http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/ 97%

AIPTN (2006), Indigenous Issues: INDIA’S FOREST RIGHTS ACT OF AIPTN (2006), Indigenous Issues: INDIA’S FOREST RIGHTS ACT OF
2006: Illusion or solution?[Online: web] Accessed 11-4-16, 2006: Illusion or solution?[Online: web] Accessed 16 Sep 2012,
URL:http://www.aitpn.org/Issues/II-09-06-Forest.pdf 12 URL:http://www.aitpn.org/Issues/II-09-06-Forest.pdf

[2]

10 90% 10: http://greencleanguide.com/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/ 90%

AIPTN (2006), Indigenous Issues: INDIA’S FOREST RIGHTS ACT OF AIPTN (2006), Indigenous Issues: INDIA’S FOREST RIGHTS ACT OF
2006: Illusion or solution?, URL:http://www.aitpn.org/Issues/ 2006: Illusion or solution?[Online: web] Accessed 16 Sep 2012,
II-09-06-Forest.pdf • URL:http://www.aitpn.org/Issues/II-09-06-Forest.pdf

[2]

18