Jenu Kurubas of Karadikallu Seek Justice Amid Land Rights Struggle
By Natash
Nagarahole – In a crucial meeting held today, Advocate Shomona Khanna, along with her legal team, met with representatives from the Karadikallu community, including J. A. Shivu, Roy David, Kamal Gopinath, Rajan, Pradyumna, and Sharanya. The discussion focused on the long-standing struggle of the Karadikallu honey shepherds to reclaim their ancestral land rights within the Nagarhole region.
A Decades-Long Struggle for Land Rights
The Karadikallu Hatturu Kollehadi honey shepherds were first displaced from their ancestral homes in Nagarhole in 1985, following the implementation of the Wildlife Protection Act. It's important to note that Nagarhole was designated a wildlife sanctuary at the time, becoming a tiger reserve only in 2006.
The community's fight for recognition under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) intensified in recent years. In September 2021, the Karadikallu Gram Sabha submitted 44 Individual Forest Rights (IFR) claims to the Kodagu Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC), which were subsequently rejected. The Gram Sabha promptly challenged this rejection, demanding an explanation.
In 2023, the Karadikallu Forest Rights Committee (FRC) resubmitted the original 44 claims, alongside an additional 8 IFR claims, bringing the total to 52. These were accompanied by one Community Forest Right (CFR) and one Community Forest Resource Right (CFRR) claim, all submitted to the Gram Sabha and then forwarded to the SDLC.
A significant development occurred in 2024 when a joint verification and Gram Sabha survey was conducted. This team included officials from the Nagarhole Reserve, Integrated Tribal Development Project (ITDP), Panchayat Development Officer (PDO), Revenue Inspector, and Nagarhole Forest Ranger. Members of the Karadikallu Gram Sabha, FRC, and one family member from each of the 52 claimant families were present. However, a critical issue has arisen: the sketches and maps generated from this joint verification are reportedly held by forest guards, and while a report was sent to the PDO (as the ex-officio head of the Karadikallu Gram Sabha), copies have not been provided to Gram Sabha or FRC members.
Advocate Khanna's Strategic Recommendations
Following a detailed discussion with Shivu, Advocate Shomona Khanna outlined a series of immediate and strategic actions for the Karadikallu community:
Immediate Actions:
The Karadikallu Gram Sabha and FRC must immediately write to the PDO, demanding the joint verification report.
The Karadikallu FRC should endorse the joint verification report and submit it to the Gram Sabha, which will then forward it to the SDLC.
The Karadikallu FRC needs to initiate the process for joint verification of their CFR claims. The Gram Sabha should set a date for this verification. If officials fail to appear on the first date, a second date should be set. If officials are absent on the second date as well, the CFR claim will be considered approved, and the FRC can submit a self-verified report to the Gram Sabha. Subsequently, the Karadikallu Gram Sabha should submit the CFR and CFRR claims to the SDLC, along with the self-verification report and any relevant maps and sketches.
Addressing Recognition Issues:
Given that the Karadikallu FRC and Gram Sabha are currently not recognized by the SDLC, ITDP, and other officials, direct intervention is crucial. Advocate Khanna recommended discussions between Karadikallu Gram Sabha leaders, FRC members, and potentially leaders from CORD (an organization working on similar issues) with officials such as the Kodagu District Magistrate, ITDP heads, and the PDO.
Gram Sabha Resolutions for Accountability:
Karadikallu is advised to convene one or more Gram Sabhas to pass resolutions, invoking Sections 7 and 8 of the FRA and Section 3(1)g of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. These resolutions should address:
The PDO's deliberate withholding of the joint verification report, demanding criminal prosecution, dismissal, and replacement of the PDO.
Deliberate delays in conducting joint verification of CFR and CFRR claims.
Systematic neglect in providing copies of official correspondence to the Gram Sabha and FRC.
Deliberate demolition of sheds, night raids, and threats by STPF (Special Task Protection Force) and forest officials, particularly during peaceful protests involving women and children.
Clarifying the B.K. Singh Supreme Court Case:
Advocate Khanna also addressed the misinterpretation of the B.K. Singh Supreme Court case by forest officials. She clarified that the court's order only places an injunction on construction activities and does not impede the implementation of the Forest Rights Act. She emphasized that the B.K. Singh petition itself does not seek to obstruct FRA implementation.
Therefore, she concluded that Nagarhole Reserve officials and the Forest Department are intentionally spreading misinformation to intimidate the Karadikallu community. In response, the FRC is advised to file complaints with the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST), Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA), State Level Monitoring Committee (SLMC), and the Karnataka Chief Minister, based on the Gram Sabha resolutions, demanding severe punishment for the responsible officials.
The meeting concluded with a clear roadmap for the Karadikallu community to pursue their rights and challenge the perceived deliberate attempts to undermine their claims.
A Decades-Long Struggle for Land Rights
The Karadikallu Hatturu Kollehadi honey shepherds were first displaced from their ancestral homes in Nagarhole in 1985, following the implementation of the Wildlife Protection Act. It's important to note that Nagarhole was designated a wildlife sanctuary at the time, becoming a tiger reserve only in 2006.
The community's fight for recognition under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) intensified in recent years. In September 2021, the Karadikallu Gram Sabha submitted 44 Individual Forest Rights (IFR) claims to the Kodagu Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC), which were subsequently rejected. The Gram Sabha promptly challenged this rejection, demanding an explanation.
In 2023, the Karadikallu Forest Rights Committee (FRC) resubmitted the original 44 claims, alongside an additional 8 IFR claims, bringing the total to 52. These were accompanied by one Community Forest Right (CFR) and one Community Forest Resource Right (CFRR) claim, all submitted to the Gram Sabha and then forwarded to the SDLC.
A significant development occurred in 2024 when a joint verification and Gram Sabha survey was conducted. This team included officials from the Nagarhole Reserve, Integrated Tribal Development Project (ITDP), Panchayat Development Officer (PDO), Revenue Inspector, and Nagarhole Forest Ranger. Members of the Karadikallu Gram Sabha, FRC, and one family member from each of the 52 claimant families were present. However, a critical issue has arisen: the sketches and maps generated from this joint verification are reportedly held by forest guards, and while a report was sent to the PDO (as the ex-officio head of the Karadikallu Gram Sabha), copies have not been provided to Gram Sabha or FRC members.
Advocate Khanna's Strategic Recommendations
Following a detailed discussion with Shivu, Advocate Shomona Khanna outlined a series of immediate and strategic actions for the Karadikallu community:
Immediate Actions:
Addressing Recognition Issues:
Given that the Karadikallu FRC and Gram Sabha are currently not recognized by the SDLC, ITDP, and other officials, direct intervention is crucial. Advocate Khanna recommended discussions between Karadikallu Gram Sabha leaders, FRC members, and potentially leaders from CORD (an organization working on similar issues) with officials such as the Kodagu District Magistrate, ITDP heads, and the PDO.
Gram Sabha Resolutions for Accountability:
Karadikallu is advised to convene one or more Gram Sabhas to pass resolutions, invoking Sections 7 and 8 of the FRA and Section 3(1)g of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. These resolutions should address:
Clarifying the B.K. Singh Supreme Court Case:
Advocate Khanna also addressed the misinterpretation of the B.K. Singh Supreme Court case by forest officials. She clarified that the court's order only places an injunction on construction activities and does not impede the implementation of the Forest Rights Act. She emphasized that the B.K. Singh petition itself does not seek to obstruct FRA implementation.
Therefore, she concluded that Nagarhole Reserve officials and the Forest Department are intentionally spreading misinformation to intimidate the Karadikallu community. In response, the FRC is advised to file complaints with the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST), Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA), State Level Monitoring Committee (SLMC), and the Karnataka Chief Minister, based on the Gram Sabha resolutions, demanding severe punishment for the responsible officials.
The meeting concluded with a clear roadmap for the Karadikallu community to pursue their rights and challenge the perceived deliberate attempts to undermine their claims.