JOIN THE LCW
COMMUNITY

Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, quarterly analytics report, curated expert talks, merchandise and much more. Support our work!

Sign up today

Caurem villagers resolve to protect sacred forest land against iron ore mining

Reported by

Malavika Neurekar

Legal Review by

Priyansha Chouhan, Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Radhika Chatterjee

Updated by

Published on

July 31, 2023

August 3, 2023

Edited on

July 31, 2023

State

Goa

Sector

Mining

People Affected by Conflict

Households Affected by Conflict

150

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

70

ha

Starting Year

2023

Location of Conflict

Caurem

Pirla

South Goa

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Iron Ore Mining

Land Conflict Summary

In April 2023, the Caurem-Pirla gram sabha or village council in South Goa, passed a resolution to oppose any state plans to divert forest land for a mining project.

The diversion of forest land has been proposed at the mountain at Survey no 19/0, an area which consists of forest and agricultural land. The Zamblidadga Iron and Manganese Ore Mine is spread across 70.20 hectares on the mountain, and lies at the heart of this conflict.

Located in Quepem, Caurem has a significant Scheduled Tribe population, a large number of whom belong to the Velip and Gaonkar communities.

The gram sabha's resolution comes after the mine owners of the area sought environmental clearance to carry out open cast iron ore mining in the area. According to the villagers, the land is a proposed reserve forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. It has one Community Forest Right (CFR) and 149 Individual Forest Right (IFR) claims pending since 2015.

As per the tribes people, they have been exploited for centuries by the Dessais, an upper caste community which forms a small slice of the village population. Earlier this used to occur through collusion with Portuguese colonisers. Today, it occurs through their collusion with mining corporations.

Mining began in Caurem in the 1960s, and intensified in 2004 with the onset of mechanised mining. Village residents claim land control was captured by mining companies through various illegal means.

"Mining has disrupted traditional agriculture and water supply, and caused a lot of damage in our village. It has led to a depleted water table, polluted fields and water bodies, and affected cultivation of paddy, coconut, jackfruit and cashew, among other crops" said tribal activist and resident Ravindra Velip.

The lease is [held](https://ibm.gov.in/writereaddata/files/07042022120458mcdr_rep_revised ZAMBLIDADGA.pdf) by late Naraina S Quirtonim and is [owned](https://ibm.gov.in/writereaddata/files/07042022120458mcdr_rep_revised ZAMBLIDADGA.pdf) by Pradnya Zoivant Poi Cano. According to Velip, “local communities have traditionally depended on these forests for agriculture and foraging; it is linked to our livelihoods. But there is also a lot of cultural and religious significance attached to the mountains.”

A report on Caurem, prepared by village elders and accessed by LCW, details the ecological and cultural significance of the mountain. Villagers use the land at Survey 19/0 for cultivation as well as to procure honey, wild mushrooms, and berries. A spring that starts at the bottom of the mountain provides irrigation to other parts of the villages.

The mountain also serves as a site to make religious offerings as the villagers believe that it is the abode of several local gods. “[In present day], the tribals could build their houses, educate their children and buy two wheeler vehicles with little savings only with blessings of this mountain,” the report reads.** **

The Community Forest Right (CFR) claim was made in July 2015 under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006. The villagers had submitted their CFR claim to the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC).

In April 2017, villagers submitted a reminder after no initiative was taken to process the claim.

In February 2023, they filed an RTI to find out the status of the CFR claim, but their concerns were not adequately addressed, according to Velip.

“The claims for CFR have been pending with the authorities for seven years and despite multiple attempts, we have not received any favourable response. Instead, they have started the process to grant an Environmental Clearance for mining,” added Velip.

On March 6, 2023, the Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) announced that a public hearing would be held on April 11, 2023 to decide on the Environment Clearance sought by the mining lease owners.

The terms of reference for conducting the environmental impact assessment (EIA) had been heard and approved by the Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in March 2022. The EIA was conducted between March 1, 2022 and May 31, 2022, while the environmental  

On April 5, 2023, the GAKUVED Federation – comprising four ST communities in the state, Gawada, Kunbi, Velip, and Dhangar – approached the Goa bench of the High Court. They requested that the CFR claim be fast-tracked and that the Environment Clearance not be processed before the settling of the claim. The federation also sought directions for restraining the scheduled public hearing.

Subsequently, the public hearing scheduled for April 11 was cancelled by the GSPCB on direction of the South Goa District Magistrate. Report suggested that the move was taken in anticipation of a law and order situation. The PIL was admitted to court on April 25, 2023.
 
LCW has approached the mining lease owners for comments but did not receive a response at the time of filing the report. 

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, Grazing, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value, Water bodies

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

51.9

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

5

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
Section 2(a) [Community Forest Resource defined to be customary forestland to which community has traditional access]; Section 2(o) [Definition of other forest dweller to include any community residing in or depending on the forestland for at least 3 generations prior to 2005]; Section 3 [Forest rights of forest-dwelling tribes to include right of ownership, access to collect and use minor forest produce which has been traditionally collected within village boundaries. Such rights also include right to in situ rehabilitation, including alternative land, if traditional forest-dwelling tribes have been illegally evicted or displaced from forestland]; Section 5 [Gram Sabha in the area is empowered to protect wildlife, biodiversity and environment]
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
Section 2 [No state government can pass orders de-reserving a reserved forest or allow forestland to be used for non-forest purpose without prior approval of the Union government]
Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006
Section 3 [State government may constitute any forestland as reserved forest] Section 4 [To constitute any land as a reserve forest the State Government shall issue a notification Official Gazette and specifying the limits of such land]
Indian Forest Act, 1927
Section 3 [State government may constitute any forestland as reserved forest] Section 4 [To constitute any land as a reserve forest the State Government shall issue a notification Official Gazette and specifying the limits of such land]
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2007
Rule 4(1)(e) [Gram Sabha to constitute a committee for the protection of wildlife, forest and biodiversity, from amongst its members to carry out functions under the Act]
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

Yes

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

The Community Forest Right (CFR) claim was made in July 2015 under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006 to the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC).

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

A decision is yet to be taken on the matter and it remains pending since seven years now.

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-implementation/violation of FRA

Scheduled Tribe status or lack of status

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Violation of free prior informed consent

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Pending

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Bombay High Court (Goa bench)

Case Number

W.P. No. 756/2023

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

The petition was filed by the villagers to expedite the process of settlement of their forest rights claims. Further, the petitioners also sought directions against the environmental clearance process. The last hearing on the matter took place before the Division Bench on July 12, 2023. The matter is still pending.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

No

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Objections as part of official procedures

Development of a network or collective

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Goa state government, Directorate of Mines and Geology, Caurem-Pirla panchayat, State EIAA, Chief Conservator of Forests, Collector, Deputy Collector, State Pollution Control Board

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

The concerned party did not respond to a request or comment till the date of filing this conflict report.

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

The concerned party did not respond to a request or comment till the date of filing this conflict report.

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Pradnya Zoivant Poi Cano alias Pradnya Zoivant Pai Cano

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Yes

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Gakuved Federation

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

In April 2023, the Caurem-Pirla gram sabha or village council in South Goa, passed a resolution to oppose any state plans to divert forest land for a mining project.

The diversion of forest land has been proposed at the mountain at Survey no 19/0, an area which consists of forest and agricultural land. The Zamblidadga Iron and Manganese Ore Mine is spread across 70.20 hectares on the mountain, and lies at the heart of this conflict.

Located in Quepem, Caurem has a significant Scheduled Tribe population, a large number of whom belong to the Velip and Gaonkar communities.

The gram sabha's resolution comes after the mine owners of the area sought environmental clearance to carry out open cast iron ore mining in the area. According to the villagers, the land is a proposed reserve forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. It has one Community Forest Right (CFR) and 149 Individual Forest Right (IFR) claims pending since 2015.

As per the tribes people, they have been exploited for centuries by the Dessais, an upper caste community which forms a small slice of the village population. Earlier this used to occur through collusion with Portuguese colonisers. Today, it occurs through their collusion with mining corporations.

Mining began in Caurem in the 1960s, and intensified in 2004 with the onset of mechanised mining. Village residents claim land control was captured by mining companies through various illegal means.

"Mining has disrupted traditional agriculture and water supply, and caused a lot of damage in our village. It has led to a depleted water table, polluted fields and water bodies, and affected cultivation of paddy, coconut, jackfruit and cashew, among other crops" said tribal activist and resident Ravindra Velip.

The lease is [held](https://ibm.gov.in/writereaddata/files/07042022120458mcdr_rep_revised ZAMBLIDADGA.pdf) by late Naraina S Quirtonim and is [owned](https://ibm.gov.in/writereaddata/files/07042022120458mcdr_rep_revised ZAMBLIDADGA.pdf) by Pradnya Zoivant Poi Cano. According to Velip, “local communities have traditionally depended on these forests for agriculture and foraging; it is linked to our livelihoods. But there is also a lot of cultural and religious significance attached to the mountains.”

A report on Caurem, prepared by village elders and accessed by LCW, details the ecological and cultural significance of the mountain. Villagers use the land at Survey 19/0 for cultivation as well as to procure honey, wild mushrooms, and berries. A spring that starts at the bottom of the mountain provides irrigation to other parts of the villages.

The mountain also serves as a site to make religious offerings as the villagers believe that it is the abode of several local gods. “[In present day], the tribals could build their houses, educate their children and buy two wheeler vehicles with little savings only with blessings of this mountain,” the report reads.** **

The Community Forest Right (CFR) claim was made in July 2015 under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006. The villagers had submitted their CFR claim to the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC).

In April 2017, villagers submitted a reminder after no initiative was taken to process the claim.

In February 2023, they filed an RTI to find out the status of the CFR claim, but their concerns were not adequately addressed, according to Velip.

“The claims for CFR have been pending with the authorities for seven years and despite multiple attempts, we have not received any favourable response. Instead, they have started the process to grant an Environmental Clearance for mining,” added Velip.

On March 6, 2023, the Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) announced that a public hearing would be held on April 11, 2023 to decide on the Environment Clearance sought by the mining lease owners.

The terms of reference for conducting the environmental impact assessment (EIA) had been heard and approved by the Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in March 2022. The EIA was conducted between March 1, 2022 and May 31, 2022, while the environmental  

On April 5, 2023, the GAKUVED Federation – comprising four ST communities in the state, Gawada, Kunbi, Velip, and Dhangar – approached the Goa bench of the High Court. They requested that the CFR claim be fast-tracked and that the Environment Clearance not be processed before the settling of the claim. The federation also sought directions for restraining the scheduled public hearing.

Subsequently, the public hearing scheduled for April 11 was cancelled by the GSPCB on direction of the South Goa District Magistrate. Report suggested that the move was taken in anticipation of a law and order situation. The PIL was admitted to court on April 25, 2023.
 
LCW has approached the mining lease owners for comments but did not receive a response at the time of filing the report. 

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Forest and Non-Forest

Total investment involved (in Crores):

51.9

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

5

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
Section 2(a) [Community Forest Resource defined to be customary forestland to which community has traditional access]; Section 2(o) [Definition of other forest dweller to include any community residing in or depending on the forestland for at least 3 generations prior to 2005]; Section 3 [Forest rights of forest-dwelling tribes to include right of ownership, access to collect and use minor forest produce which has been traditionally collected within village boundaries. Such rights also include right to in situ rehabilitation, including alternative land, if traditional forest-dwelling tribes have been illegally evicted or displaced from forestland]; Section 5 [Gram Sabha in the area is empowered to protect wildlife, biodiversity and environment]
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
Section 2 [No state government can pass orders de-reserving a reserved forest or allow forestland to be used for non-forest purpose without prior approval of the Union government]
Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006
Section 3 [State government may constitute any forestland as reserved forest] Section 4 [To constitute any land as a reserve forest the State Government shall issue a notification Official Gazette and specifying the limits of such land]
Indian Forest Act, 1927
Section 3 [State government may constitute any forestland as reserved forest] Section 4 [To constitute any land as a reserve forest the State Government shall issue a notification Official Gazette and specifying the limits of such land]
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2007
Rule 4(1)(e) [Gram Sabha to constitute a committee for the protection of wildlife, forest and biodiversity, from amongst its members to carry out functions under the Act]
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

Yes

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

The Community Forest Right (CFR) claim was made in July 2015 under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006 to the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC).

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

A decision is yet to be taken on the matter and it remains pending since seven years now.

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-implementation/violation of FRA

Scheduled Tribe status or lack of status

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Violation of free prior informed consent

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Pending

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Bombay High Court (Goa bench)

Case Number

W.P. No. 756/2023

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

The petition was filed by the villagers to expedite the process of settlement of their forest rights claims. Further, the petitioners also sought directions against the environmental clearance process. The last hearing on the matter took place before the Division Bench on July 12, 2023. The matter is still pending.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

No

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Objections as part of official procedures

Development of a network or collective

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Goa state government, Directorate of Mines and Geology, Caurem-Pirla panchayat, State EIAA, Chief Conservator of Forests, Collector, Deputy Collector, State Pollution Control Board

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

The concerned party did not respond to a request or comment till the date of filing this conflict report.

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Pradnya Zoivant Poi Cano alias Pradnya Zoivant Pai Cano

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

The concerned party did not respond to a request or comment till the date of filing this conflict report.

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Gakuved Federation

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch
cross
Not a member yet?
Sign up now