Legal Data by
May 11, 2017
May 11, 2017
May 11, 2017
Manas was declared a National Park in September 1990. In 1992, UNESCO further declared it a World Heritage Site endangered due to heavy rhino poaching. The core area of the park is not highly inhabited, with about 57 villages living in the buffer zone. It is dominated by the Bodos as the park is part of the Bodoland Territorial Region. However, there are also many Adivasis living within the park, brought from central India to Assam by the British in the preindependent period to work as labourers in tea gardens.
In 2011, the park was taken off the 'List of World Heritage Sites in Danger', yet the park authorities decided to evict the families living within the park. The eviction drive started in 2016, when Bodos living in Bhuyanpara Range were evicted. The eviction displaced at least 700 families. As per notification No. FD/TP/WHS/333948 submitted to the principal chief conservator of forests and wildlife and the chief wildlife warden of Assam, an eviction drive was carried out on December 22, 2016in Betbari, Kohirabari and Dihira Panda villages, spread over an area of 16 square kilometres. According to the notification, the eviction of 550 households was successful and was carried out with the assistance of 350 police and armed personnel.
The residents of the three villages have been fighting with the forest department to assert their rights over the forestland. The forest department, on the other hand, considers the people encroachers. As per the Forest Rights Act, 2006, tribespeople residing in forestland since before 2005 have rights over the land and its resources.
In a report in 2019, the families evicted from Bhuyanpara have since returned. A report of the Central government also mentioned that no rhino has been killed in Manas National Park since 2016. In 2020, however, the International Union for Conservation of Nature asked the Centre to clear "illegal encroachment" within the park and directed the state and the Bodoland Territorial Council to take prompt action.
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources
Total investment involved (in Crores):
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
Page Number In Investment Document:
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Central/State Government Policy
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
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:
Forced evictions/dispossession of land
Lack of legal protection over land rights
Non-implementation/violation of FRA
Out of Court
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nature of Protest
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Forest Department, National Tiger Conservation Authority
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: