Ministry by ministry, India’s forest rights regime is fraying
The Ministry of Tribal Affairs has stated that the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 and its implementing rules contain "no provision for obtaining consent of the Gram Sabha" for Stage-II forest clearance, and that the matter falls outside its jurisdiction — despite the Ministry being the Act's designated nodal implementing agency.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Undertakings, in an August 2026 report examining NHPC Limited, identified the requirement that all affected Gram Sabhas give consent to forest diversion as the "single most critical bottleneck" in project clearances, citing an average clearance timeline of 106 months (nearly nine years).
The Committee endorsed a proposal that a "qualified supermajority" — consent from 70-75% of affected Gram Sabhas — should suffice for large hydropower projects of national importance, replacing the current requirement of unanimous consent from every affected Gram Sabha.
The report cited the Teesta-IV hydroelectric project as an example where clearance has remained stalled because consent from a small minority of gram panchayats was pending.
The development reflects a broader pattern flagged by commentators wherein successive ministries (Environment, Tribal Affairs, Power) have progressively diluted the practical weight given to Gram Sabha consent in forest-diversion decisions.
The Forest Rights Act, 2006 — Origin and Core Framework
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 was enacted to correct the "historical injustice" done to forest-dwelling communities whose rights were not recorded during colonial and post-colonial forest settlements. It recognizes both individual forest rights (IFR) — such as habitation and cultivation rights over land in occupation — and community forest rights (CFR), including rights to minor forest produce, grazing, and community forest resource management.
The Ministry of Tribal Affairs' claim that the FRA contains no express consent requirement for Stage-II clearance is technically about the statute's text, but the consent step actually derives from the Forest (Conservation) Act framework — creating an inter-ministerial ambiguity over whose responsibility it is to enforce it.
Forest (Conservation) Act Diversion Process and the Gram Sabha "Consent" Requirement
Diversion of forest land for non-forest use (such as a mine, dam, or highway) requires clearance under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (renamed the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam in 2023). This clearance happens in two stages — Stage-I (in-principle) and Stage-II (final). Rules framed under this Act and MoEFCC guidelines require that the Forest Rights Act recognition process (identification of claims, vesting of rights, and a Gram Sabha resolution/no-objection) be completed before Stage-II clearance is granted.
Key Details
- The consent requirement is not written into the FRA itself; it flows from a 2009 MoEFCC circular linking forest diversion clearance to completion of the FRA recognition process, later read into Forest (Conservation) Rules.
- Because it is a Ministry guideline/rule-based requirement rather than a Forest Rights Act statutory clause, it can be diluted through executive rule-changes rather than a full amendment to the Act — a route seen as an easier way to weaken protections without parliamentary scrutiny.
- Under the current practice, consent (or lack of objection) from every affected Gram Sabha is sought before Stage-II clearance for hydropower, mining, and linear infrastructure projects.
The Committee's proposed shift to a 70-75% supermajority standard would replace the "all Gram Sabhas must agree" norm with a majoritarian one, directly reducing the veto power of individual project-affected villages.
Parliamentary Committees — Standing Committees vs Committee on Public Undertakings
Parliament exercises oversight of the executive partly through Department-Related Standing Committees (24 in number, covering all ministries) and specialised committees such as the Committee on Public Undertakings (COPU), which examines the reports and accounts of Public Sector Undertakings including their working, autonomy, and efficiency — NHPC being a Central PSU under the Ministry of Power.
COPU's recommendation is a Parliamentary oversight body's advisory report, not a binding directive — but such reports carry weight because ministries often use them to justify subsequent rule changes, as seen in past dilutions of environmental clearance norms.
- Average time for forest clearance of under-construction projects examined by the Committee: 106 months (~9 years).
- COPU's proposed consent threshold: 70-75% of affected Gram Sabhas (versus the current requirement of consent from all affected Gram Sabhas).
- The Forest Rights Act, 2006 recognizes 13 categories of forest rights under Section 3.
- Ministry of Tribal Affairs statement on the issue: made on August 31, 2026.
- Example project cited as stalled over pending consent: the Teesta-IV hydroelectric project.
- Nodal ministry for the FRA: Ministry of Tribal Affairs; nodal ministry for forest clearance: Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.