Chhattisgarh Forest Department Withdraws Controversial Community Forest Resource Rights Directive After Tribal Protests

New Delhi : In a significant development for tribal communities and forest dwellers in Chhattisgarh, the state’s forest department has withdrawn a contentious directive issued on May 15, 2025, that restricted other government departments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and private entities from engaging in activities related to Community Forest Resource Rights (CFRR). The decision follows widespread protests across tribal regions, with demonstrators labeling the order unconstitutional and a violation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA). The withdrawal, ordered by Forest Minister Kedar Kashyap, marks a victory for Gram Sabhas and activists advocating for community-led forest governance.

Background of the Controversy

The May 15 directive, signed by Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) and Head of Forest Force V Sreenivasa Rao, declared the forest department as the “nodal agency” for implementing CFRR, effectively barring external entities, including NGOs and other government departments, from supporting Gram Sabhas in managing community forest resources. The order cited a 2020 central communication and aimed to align CFRR management with the National Working Plan Code (NWPC) 2023, which serves as a guideline for the scientific management of India’s forest divisions. The directive mandated that the forest department would oversee CFRR lands until the central government provided model management plans.

This move sparked immediate backlash from tribal communities, Gram Sabhas, and civil society groups, who argued that it undermined the legal autonomy granted to Gram Sabhas under the FRA. The Forest Rights Act, enacted in 2006, empowers Gram Sabhas to manage, conserve, and sustainably utilize community forest resources, ensuring that forest-dwelling communities have authority over their ancestral lands. The May 15 order was perceived as an attempt to centralize control, contradicting the FRA’s spirit and the constitutional provisions under the Fifth Schedule and the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA), which emphasize Gram Sabha supremacy.

Community Forest Resource Rights (CFRR) Explained

CFRR, as defined under the FRA, grants forest-dwelling communities the right to “protect, regenerate, conserve, or manage” community forest resources through their Gram Sabhas. These resources include common forest lands traditionally protected and conserved for sustainable use by specific communities. CFRR empowers communities to formulate rules for forest use, both by themselves and others, and to fulfill their responsibilities under the FRA, such as safeguarding wildlife, biodiversity, and cultural heritage. Section 3(1)(i) of the FRA explicitly recognizes the right to manage forest resources, while Section 5 empowers Gram Sabhas to curb activities that harm ecosystems. Additionally, Rule 4(1)(e) and Rule 4(1)(f) of the FRA Rules, 2012, designate Gram Sabhas as the primary entities for initiating rights determination and conservation planning.

In Chhattisgarh, CFRR recognition has been significant, with the state distributing 4,78,641 individual titles and 4,349 CFRR titles, covering over 20,06,224 hectares (approximately 20,000 square kilometers) of forest land. This achievement has positioned Chhattisgarh as a leading state in CFRR implementation, benefiting millions of forest dwellers and strengthening tribal self-governance.

The National Working Plan Code (NWPC) 2023

The NWPC, first released by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) in 2004 and amended in 2014, serves as a guiding framework for the scientific management of India’s forest divisions. The 2023 update aimed to standardize forest management practices. The Chhattisgarh forest department’s May 15 directive referenced the NWPC, claiming it necessitated departmental oversight to ensure “scientific forest management.” However, critics argued that this interpretation misrepresented the NWPC’s role, as it was not intended to override the community-led governance model established by the FRA.

The forest department’s insistence on NWPC compliance was seen as an attempt to impose bureaucratic control, halting CFRR-related work until model management plans were issued by the central government. This stance deepened tensions between the department and Gram Sabhas, as it restricted external support, including from NGOs involved in the Dharti Aba Janjatiya Gram Utkarsh Abhiyan (DAJGUA) scheme, which was designed to assist communities in CFR management.

Protests and Public Outcry

The May 15 directive triggered widespread protests across Chhattisgarh’s tribal districts, including Nagri, Ambikapur, Kanker, Gaurela, Narayanpur, Gariaband, Pithora, Balod, and Bastar. On July 1 and 2, 2025, spontaneous rallies saw tribal communities and activists submitting memorandums to Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai, demanding the directive’s withdrawal. Protesters described the order as a direct breach of the FRA and constitutional provisions related to Scheduled Areas, accusing the forest department of encroaching on the jurisdiction of the Tribal Development Department.

Activists highlighted that the directive’s designation of the forest department as the “nodal agency” was legally untenable, as Rule 12A(6) of the FRA limits the department’s role to providing technical support, such as maps and boundary demarcations, to assist Gram Sabhas in formulating CFR management plans. By barring NGOs and other departments, the forest department was seen as adopting a regulatory stance, echoing colonial-era centralization and undermining the FRA’s democratic framework.

Forest Department’s Response and Withdrawal

Facing mounting pressure, the Chhattisgarh forest department issued a corrigendum on June 23, 2025, clarifying that the reference to “nodal agency” was a typographical error and that the department’s role was intended to be that of a “facilitator/coordinator.” However, this clarification failed to quell the unrest, as communities and activists continued to view the directive as an attempt to restrict their rights. On July 3, 2025, Forest Minister Kedar Kashyap ordered the withdrawal of both the May 15 directive and the June 23 corrigendum, acknowledging the confusion and protests they had caused.

In a press statement, the forest department emphasized its “proactive, constructive, and exemplary role” in recognizing and distributing forest rights, citing the 4,78,641 individual titles and 4,349 CFRR titles granted. The department clarified that the May 15 advisory was an interim measure to ensure that CFRR management plans were scientifically harmonized with the NWPC 2023, addressing inconsistencies in field-level implementation that risked ecological degradation and inter-departmental disputes. However, it acknowledged that some NGOs and Gram Sabhas had misinterpreted the advisory as an attempt to curb their rights.

The department has since written to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) and the MoEF&CC, urging them to urgently issue model CFRR management plans, detailed implementation guidelines, and training modules for stakeholders. This move aims to address the gaps in clarity that led to the controversy and ensure that community-led forest management aligns with national standards without compromising Gram Sabha autonomy.

The Role of Gram Sabhas and the FRA

The FRA represents a landmark legislation aimed at addressing historical injustices faced by forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers. By recognizing individual rights (e.g., self-cultivation and habitation) and community rights (e.g., grazing, fishing, and access to traditional knowledge), the Act promotes livelihood security and sustainable resource use. At its core, the FRA empowers Gram Sabhas as the supreme authority in managing CFR areas, enabling communities to create tailored conservation plans based on their traditional knowledge and dependence on forests.

The Chhattisgarh forest department’s May 15 directive was seen as a direct challenge to this framework, as it sought to regulate rather than facilitate community-led governance. The FRA’s Rule 12A(6) clearly mandates that the forest department’s role is limited to providing technical assistance, such as forest cover data and wildlife information, to support Gram Sabhas. By contrast, the department’s actions, justified by its interpretation of the NWPC and a 2020 central circular, halted progress on CFRR implementation and stalled initiatives like the DAJGUA scheme.

Broader Implications and Challenges

The Chhattisgarh case highlights a broader tension between bureaucratic control and community empowerment in forest governance. The forest department’s regulatory approach risks alienating communities, fostering resentment, and undermining participatory governance. Critics argue that the department’s stance reflects a top-down conservation narrative that marginalizes local perspectives, often blaming forest dwellers for ecological issues while overlooking industrial encroachments and monoculture plantations.

The silence of larger NGOs, which initially championed FRA implementation but have since refrained from criticizing the forest department, has also drawn scrutiny. Smaller activist groups have been left to advocate for community rights, highlighting the need for greater accountability and support for grassroots movements. Additionally, challenges such as limited awareness among Gram Sabhas, inadequate technical expertise, and insufficient funding continue to hinder effective CFRR implementation.

Recommendations for the Future

To uphold the FRA’s vision, several reforms are necessary. The Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs must issue clear directives affirming Gram Sabha autonomy and restricting the forest department to a facilitative role. The swift release of NWPC-aligned model CFRR plans, accompanied by training programs and resource allocation, would bridge capacity gaps and enable communities to develop robust management plans. Reinstating NGO collaboration under schemes like DAJGUA, with Gram Sabha consent, is critical to supporting sustainable forest governance.

Furthermore, all forest activities, including NWPC-linked operations like tree felling, should require Gram Sabha approval to ensure alignment with community priorities. Full revenue transfers from forest produce, such as tendu leaves, and the dissolution of Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMCs) in favor of Gram Sabha-led governance would further empower communities. District Mineral Foundations should also support resource protection, while co-management of tiger reserves must avoid forced relocations, particularly for Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups and single women.

Conclusion

The withdrawal of Chhattisgarh’s May 15 directive is a testament to the power of collective action by tribal communities and activists. By reaffirming the supremacy of Gram Sabhas, the state has taken a step toward aligning with the FRA’s vision of justice and sustainability. However, the incident underscores the need for clear guidelines, robust support systems, and a shift from regulatory to facilitative roles for forest departments. As Chhattisgarh awaits further direction from the central government, the focus must remain on empowering forest-dwelling communities to manage their resources, ensuring a harmonious balance between conservation and livelihoods.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)