Gujarat
Tibi village
,
Sasan
,
Junagadh
Published :
Apr 2026
|
Updated :
Compensatory afforestation on Commons and rural livelihood in the Gir safari road expansion project in Gujarat
Reported by
Suchak Patel
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Rakshit Dhingra, Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
118
Households affected
563
People affected
2025
Year started
2.27
ha.
Land area affected
118
Households affected
563
People Affected
2025
Year started
2.27
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Roads
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Roads
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

A road-widening project linked to the Gir lion safari route has sparked a land conflict in Junagadh district of Gujarat, after authorities proposed using grazing land for compensatory afforestation.

The Roads and Buildings (R&B) Department has initiated work to widen a three-kilometre forest stretch of State Highway 26 between Mendarda and Sasan. The highway is a key access route for tourists visiting the Gir National Park, home to the Asiatic lion.

To take up the project, the department submitted a proposal on the Parivesh portal seeking permission to divert forest land. While the Forest Department has granted in-principle approval for the diversion, it has mandated compensatory afforestation as part of the clearance process. However, the land identified for compensatory afforestation is "gauchar" (village grazing) land, which has triggered strong opposition from residents of villages in Mendarda taluka.

According to a letter dated 15 May 2025 written by the Junagadh District Collector to the Deputy Secretary of the Revenue Department, accessed through the Right to Information (RTI) application, officials have identified government land in Tibi village for allocation to the Forest Department in lieu of the forest land required for the road project.

The communication notes that the Executive Engineer of the R&B Department had requested the identification of equivalent land after approximately 2.27 hectares of forest land was proposed to be used for widening and strengthening the Junagadh–Khadiya–Sasan and Talala–Sasan road stretch passing through the Gir sanctuary area and reserved forest.

Following this request, revenue officials including the Mamlatdar and the Provincial Officer of Mendarda inspected survey number 35 of Timbi village in December 2024. The land, classified as government-owned and currently open and fallow with scattered vegetation, was considered suitable for compensatory afforestation.

Local panchayats reportedly provided their opinion supporting the allotment of the land for this purpose. Officials also attached satellite maps and photographs of the site as part of the proposal.

The District Land Valuation Committee, in its meeting on 8 May 2025, assessed the agricultural value of the identified land. Based on the valuation, the total estimated value of the 2.27-hectare land parcel was calculated at approximately Rs 66.19 lakh.

Despite the administrative approvals, farmers and residents of the surrounding villages have strongly opposed the proposal, arguing that the diversion of "gauchar" land threatens their livestock-based livelihoods.

Villagers say grazing land is already scarce in the region and have warned that they will not part with even an inch of it. Some residents have also questioned the Forest Department’s authority and decision-making in identifying community grazing land for compensatory afforestation.

The dispute highlights the growing tensions between infrastructure expansion and the protection of common lands that rural communities depend on for their livelihoods.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Non-Forest (Grazing Land)

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?

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

Grazing

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Junagadh District Administration

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

5
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?

Legal Supporting Documents

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
Author
Reported by
Suchak Patel
Suchak is an independent researcher.
Show more work
Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

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

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?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Grazing

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

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
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us