Controversy Arises Over Gram Sabha Resolutions for Great Nicobar Project
‘Identical language, 60 common signatures’: Gram Sabha resolutions called into question
The Indian Express
Image: The Indian Express
Three Gram Sabha resolutions supporting the diversion of 166.10 sq km of forest land for the Great Nicobar project are under scrutiny, as they allegedly reflect the consent of settlers rather than the indigenous Nicobarese and Shompen tribes. A petition claims procedural violations in the approval process, raising concerns about the legitimacy of tribal consent.
- 01The Calcutta High Court is reviewing allegations of procedural irregularities in Gram Sabha resolutions.
- 02Petitioner Meena Gupta claims the resolutions reflect settler consent, not that of indigenous tribes.
- 03At least 60 signatures were found duplicated across the resolutions, raising questions about their validity.
- 04The composition of the sub-divisional level committee (SDLC) is contested for not including adequate tribal representation.
- 05The tribal council of Little and Great Nicobar Island had previously revoked its consent for the project.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
The Andaman and Nicobar Islands administration's claim of tribal consent for the diversion of 166.10 sq km of forest land for the Great Nicobar project is being challenged in the Calcutta High Court. The petitioner, Meena Gupta (former union government secretary), argues that the three Gram Sabha resolutions cited as proof of consent were signed by settlers rather than the indigenous Nicobarese and Shompen tribes. Gupta's counter-affidavit highlights that at least 60 names appeared on multiple resolutions, suggesting procedural irregularities. The resolutions were passed on August 12, 2022, at three different locations, but the language used was identical, indicating a lack of genuine deliberation. Additionally, Gupta contends that the sub-divisional level committee (SDLC) responsible for reviewing these resolutions lacked proper representation from the tribal communities, as mandated by the Forest Rights Act (FRA) of 2006. The administration's assertion of having followed due process is called into question, particularly as the tribal council had previously revoked its no-objection to the project, citing unresolved forest rights issues. The court has agreed to hear the petition, overruling objections from the Centre regarding its maintainability.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
The outcome of this legal challenge could significantly affect the rights of indigenous tribes in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, particularly regarding land use and development projects.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
Reader Poll
Do you believe the voices of indigenous tribes should be prioritized in development projects?
Connecting to poll...
More about Andaman and Nicobar Islands administration
Read the original article
Visit the source for the complete story.





