Over the past few years, tribespeople in Khammam district have been at the receiving end of the state Forest Department's attempts to forcibly take over their podu lands. Several thousand tribal households have been traditionally practising "podu" (slash and burn or swidden) cultivation in roughly 250,000 acres. However, as of July 2020, land titles granting forest rights had been distributed under the to only 93,639 of the 1,86,679 claims received by the government.
The conflict is rooted in Telangana's flagship afforestation programme, Haritha Haram (Green Garland), under which the state government aims to plant 230 crore saplings across the state to increase its forest cover from 24 percent to 33 percent. However, of the 66 lakh acres of the state's forestland, 18 lakh acres do not have proper ownership records, creating substantial confusion and conflict about whether the earmarked land belongs to the tribespeople or the forest department.
The confusion over ownership of lands has been capitalised by political parties and has resulted in several ambiguous decisions. In July 2019, a woman forest officer was brutally attacked by a mob, allegedly belonging to the ruling Telangana Rashtra Samithi that has championed Haritha Haram. A year later, in June 2020, 14 Adivasis were beaten up and booked under several criminal sections for obstructing forest officers from doing their work. Moreover, the Forest Department, with the help of police personnel, has also reportedly been resorting to strong-arm tactics like destruction of standing crops, threats, filing false cases against several tribespeople and also using physical force. In February 2021, hundreds of tribespeople protesting against the implementation of the programme on their podu lands were joined by political parties like the CPI and CPM. There has also been a suicide attempt by a tribal woman in protest of the acquisition of her land.
There are numerous claims from the tribal community alleging that they have documents to prove their ownership, forest authorities claim that these lands lie elsewhere, away from the area where the programme is being implemented.
On 11 October 2022, a case was registered against 18 tribals of Venkaramuni thanda under Tallada mandal for allegedly trying to occupy land belonging to the Forest Department. A month later, a forest officer in Telangana’s Bhadradri Kothagudem district was killed while, along with other officials, trying to evict tribals illegally grazing cattle on forest plantations on 23 November. Two tribals from Guttikoya were sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder in August 2023.
Fresh clashes erupted between tribals and police personnel on 31 March 2024 as the latter intervened to resolve a dispute claim over nine hectares of forest land at Chandrayapalem in the mandal. As on 1 April 2024, the government had received over 4,14,353 applications from 2,845 gram panchayats across 28 districts, encompassing a staggering 12,46,846 acres of land allocated to the beneficiaries.
Nearly 1.5 lakh tribals were handed over pattas covering about four lakh acres in 2023. However, a news report flagged that the Forest Department denied tribals permission to cultivate the lands, sink borewells, use tractors and get power connections.
On 26 July 2025, clashes broke out between farmers and forest officials in Yellannanagar, Konijarla mandal, over podu lands. While farmers accused officials of uprooting cotton crops, the Forest Department claimed encroachment on forest land.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Refusal to give up land for the project
Complaint against procedural violations
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common
Forest
What was the action taken by the police?
Arrest
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?
Yes, they were produced within 24 hours
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?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Project underway despite protests
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Agricultural land
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
3350
Type of investment:
Cost of Project
Year of Estimation
2019
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws
Legislations/Policies Involved
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Non-implementation/violation of FRA
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Pending
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Supreme Court of India; High Court for the State of Telangana
Case Number
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 109/2008; WRIT PETITION NO: 15152 OF 2025
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Arrest/detention/imprisonment
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Yes
Reported Details of the Violation:
14 Adivasis were beaten up and booked under several criminal sections for obstructing forest officers from doing their work. On November 22nd 2022, two tribals killed a Forest range officer Chalamala Srinivasa Rao.
Date of Violation
June 20, 2020
Location of Violation
Khammam District
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Telangana Forest Department, Telangana Revenue Department
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
No
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
No
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Adivasis, Adivasi Joint Action Committee
What was the action taken by the police?
Arrest
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?
Yes, they were produced within 24 hours
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?
