The Tharu community’s long struggle for recognition has once again reached a moment of pause in the Allahabad High Court. The petition filed by Santari Ram Rana and Sadai, representing the Tharu Scheduled Tribe of Kajaria village in Lakhimpur Kheri, challenges what they call the State’s “arbitrary and mechanical” denial of forest rights under the Forest Rights Act, 2006. The said matter was supposed to be heard on October 13, however, the matter could not be taken up as the bench rose early. The next date is now expected to be scheduled after Diwali. It is notable that the State has not yet filed its counter affidavit, even though more than a month has passed since the previous hearing on September 8, 2025. This continued inaction underscores the State’s delay in engaging with the petitioners’ grave allegations of administrative harassment and the arbitrary denial of their vested forest rights—an issue that lies at the heart of the Tharu community’s decades-long struggle for recognition and justice.
The core of this legal battle rests on the historical injustice faced by the Tharu community, a Scheduled Tribe residing in the village of Kajaria, Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh. This is the story of Santari Ram Rana and Sadai, two representatives of the ancient Tharu Scheduled Tribe, who brought the Government of Uttar Pradesh to the High Court of Allahabad in 2025. Their petition is a meticulously documented protest against what they describe as the arbitrary, illegal, and mechanical denial of their fundamental rights under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006. It is a desperate legal appeal to halt the continuous, systematic erasure of a forest community’s identity and livelihood. Notably, the said petition was filed through Advocate Rajat Srivastava and Advocate Nandini Verma and also involved local activist Rajnish Gambhir. The matter remains sub-judice in the Allahabad High Court.
Among its four pillars of action, the land and livelihood rights of Adivasis and traditional forest dwellers, is one. CJP, with its expertise in navigating cases of human rights violations in the courts and beyond has been active on the issue; partnering with the All India Union of Forest Working Peoples (AIUFWP) since 2017 to battle any setback to these rights in the courts. This includes legally fighting back against malicious prosecution of leaders of the community and defending the Forest Rights Act, 2006 in the Supreme Court. We stand with the millions of Forest Dwellers and Adivasis whose lives and livelihoods are threatened. Please support our efforts by donating here.
The Tharu’s have deep, recognised roots in the forest lands:
- Official recognition: The Tharu community was officially recognised and notified as a Scheduled Tribe by the President of India on June 24, 1967.
- Vested rights: Their village, Kajaria, was included in the 1982 Action Plan of the Wildlife Conservation Organization, acknowledging it as a village inhabited by the Tharu community. Furthermore, the land was granted or reaffirmed as a revenue village in 1975 and 1976 through two different Government Orders. The petition argues the community has been living in these forests for more than a century.
The Legal Framework: The Forest Rights Act
The petitioners base their claim on the landmark Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA). This Act was enacted to recognise and vest forest rights for forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes, like the Tharu, who were subjected to “historical injustice”.
The FRA is more than a statute; it is a restorative justice measure. The petition meticulously details how the District Level Committee (DLC) vitiated the very spirit and procedure of the Act. The FRA mandates a strict, three-tier democratic process to verify and vest rights:
- Village Level (Gram Sabha/FRC): The community, the initial authority, verified and accepted the Tharu claim in 2013.
- Sub-Divisional Level (SDLC): This tier is tasked with resolving disputes and forwarding verified claims.
- District Level (DLC): The final legal authority for granting the title.
The Eight-Year Ordeal: Claiming community rights
The petitioners’ journey to secure their Community Forest Resource (CFR) rights—which include collecting firewood (jalauni lakdi), phoos, and cattle grazing—began over a decade ago and was marred by years of official inaction:
- 2013: The Village Level FRC, constituted by the Gram Sabha of Kajaria, accepted the petitioners’ claims under the prescribed Form C.
- 2013-2020: The seven-year stalling: The verified claims were forwarded to the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC) on July 31, 2013. For the next seven years, the SDLC allegedly failed to decide the claims due to “repeated objections” and “baseless and frivolous technical and procedural objections” consistently raised by the Forest Department. The petitioners assert that this was a deliberate attempt to deny their rightful claims.
- December 26, 2020: Conditional approval: Finally, the SDLC approved the claims and forwarded them to the District Level Committee (DLC) for the final decision.
The arbitrary rejection
The climax of the ordeal came with the decision of the highest administrative body:
- March 15, 2021: Impugned order: The District Level Committee (DLC), the final authority, rejected the community’s claims in an order the petition deems “illegal, arbitrary and ultra vires”. The rejection order was a stereotyped and mechanical rejection, similar to those passed for approximately 20 other Tharu villages on the same grounds.
- Violation of due process: The rejection was passed unilaterally, without granting the petitioners a mandatory opportunity of hearing and without adhering to the due process established by the FRA and its accompanying Rules.
- Flawed grounds for rejection: The DLC is accused of basing its rejection on “extraneous and irrelevant material”. For instance, it considered that the village had been granted revenue status and was receiving government welfare benefits, ignoring the fact that the FRA explicitly confers forest rights regardless of the revenue status of the village. The rejection also relies on a misinterpreted interim order of the Supreme Court (Thirumal Kapad v. Union of India), which the petitioners argue cannot override their statutory rights under the FRA.
A plea for justice and protection
The petition details the petitioners’ desperate attempts to seek justice post-rejection:
- Lack of redressal: The petitioners submitted multiple representations (e.g., on August 15, 2021, and November 25, 2021) to the DLC, SDLC, and the State Level Monitoring Committee (SLMC). The SLMC, whose statutory function is to monitor the recognition process, failed to act on the grievances.
- Ongoing harassment: The non-recognition of their vested rights is causing the petitioners to face “continuous harassment and threats from forest officials”. They allege they are subject to adversity and even forged FIRs when attempting to exercise their basic rights, such as collecting firewood.
- Failure of the monitoring body: The petitioners’ repeated appeals to the State Level Monitoring Committee (SLMC)—the statutory body created to oversee and correct the FRA implementation—were ignored. The SLMC’s failure to perform its duty is highlighted as a further example of the State’s abdication of responsibility.
The petition concludes that the non-conferment of forest rights is a violation of the petitioners’ fundamental rights (Article 21) and a continuation of the historical injustice that the FRA was specifically designed to remedy.
The relief sought
The petition is, therefore, a fervent appeal to the High Court to restore the sanctity of the FRA and the fundamental rights of the community. They seek:
- Quash the impugned order: Issue a writ of Certiorari to set aside the arbitrary rejection order of the District Level Committee dated March 15, 2021.
- Order reconsideration: Issue a writ of Mandamus commanding the District Level Committee to reconsider and decide the claims afresh in a time-bound and legal manner, in full accordance with the FRA.
- Ensure oversight: Issue a writ of Mandamus commanding the State Level Monitoring Committee to perform its statutory monitoring functions.
- Grant interim relief: Allow the petitioners to immediately exercise their community forest rights (for jalauni lakdi, phoos, and grazing) during the pendency of the writ petition.
This writ petition is a powerful judicial attempt to dismantle bureaucratic tyranny and ensure that the “historical injustice” recognised by Parliament is finally undone for the Tharu people of Kajaria.
Illustration: Urvi Sawant /behenbox.com
Related:
MoEFCC subverting the Forest Rights Act, 2006: 150 Citizens groups
AIUFWP submits letter LoP Rahul Gandhi, calls for action as forest rights remain in limbo
Adivasi Land Rights Erosion: The effects of the 2023 Forest Conservation Amendment Act