Welcome to LCW’s latest newsletter!

From stalled global talks on plastic pollution to contested relocations in tiger reserves, we bring you insights on negotiations, both at the international stage and in India’s villages. Our researchers tracked the deadlock at the UN plastics treaty in Geneva, unpacked India’s history of challenging production curbs, and looked at conflicts ranging from relocations in Tadoba to illegal mining along the Ganga. We also dive into policy shifts on coal, forest rights, and rehabilitation laws that shape how communities experience land and environment.

Geneva Negotiations End Without Consensus
 
The sixth and intended final round of negotiations for a Global Plastics Treaty in Geneva (Session 5.2 of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee) convened by the United Nations Environment Programme concluded without agreement. The negotiations stalled amid contrary views by two powerful blocs: the High Ambition Coalition (over 95+ countries including several European and African states) seeking binding measures on plastic production and chemicals of concern, and the Low Ambition Coalition (largely comprising oil-producing and petrochemical states such as India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Kuwait) who argued for a treaty limited to waste management. Countries remained divided over the very scope of the treaty, with some delegations suggesting a return to a 2024 draft agreed to in Busan.

India maintained that plastics, having been introduced and commercialised by the Global North, cannot be curbed in developing countries without access to appropriate technology and finance. It invoked the principle of common but differentiated responsibility, calling for financial assistance and technology transfer rather than production caps. This approach placed India alongside other petrochemical producers, while differing from the position of Europe that wanted curbs on plastics and bans on “chemicals of concerns”. Small island states and several African nations aligned with this coalition as they stressed plastics are a transboundary problem disproportionately affecting them and called for an ambitious global framework. Read the report written by our researcher Sukriti Vats, who was present at the negotiation.

National Policy Trajectory on Plastics
 
India’s stance on plastics has long mirrored its domestic regulatory history. The Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals has been opposing production curbs since the late 2000s. They even called plastic pollution a “myth” in a 2010 note to the country's top bureaucrats. An analysis of over 5,600 RTI documents shows how sustained industry lobbying reinforced this position, particularly through the unverified claim that India recycles 60% of its plastic, which continues to appear in policy documents. As a result, policy has shifted away from limiting production toward Plastic Waste Management (PWM). Even the 2021 single-use plastic ban applied to just 2–3% of plastics, excluding multilayered packaging. Meanwhile, centralised rules weakened stronger state-level bans and technologies like waste-to-energy plants were promoted despite environmental concerns, underscoring India’s preference for downstream waste solutions over upstream production cuts. Read the two part report written by Sukriti Vats. (1) (2)

Voluntary or Forced? Inside the Push to Relocate Tadoba’s Last Village
 
Rantalodhi, the last village inside Maharashtra’s Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve, faces a contested relocation. Authorities call it voluntary, but residents allege coercion like ration cuts, bulldozed schools, blocked health services, and threats of flooding fields. Over 2,500 families have already moved nearly 60 km away, leaving 33 families behind. Despite records of customary rights, villagers have not been granted titles under Forest Rights Act (2006), limiting them to standard compensation that overlooks cultural and livelihood ties to the forest. The conflict reflects a long-disputed India’s conservation model that prioritises creating “inviolate” spaces over recognising adivasi communities’ long history of coexistence with wildlife. Read the report by Sukriti Vats. 

Policy in focus

 
Does the DAJGUA Scheme Risk Diluting Gram Sabha's Role in FRA by Involving Private Agencies?
 
Launched in October 2024, the Dharti Aaba Janjatiya Gram Utkarsh Abhiyan (DAJGUA) an umbrella programme which converges schemes, entitlements and welfare programmes for the tribal community. It includes digitising FRA data, setting up support cells, and involving civil society in creating Community Forest Resource (CFR) plans. While positioned as a step toward self-governance and rights recognition, experts warn it could dilute Gram Sabha autonomy by involving private tech agencies and hosting data on the Gati Shakti portal, which serves infrastructure planning. Concerns also include bypassing tribal departments and increased claim rejections. However, financial transfers to Gram Sabhas and support for community claims are seen as promising innovations. Read the whole report by Sukriti Vats.
 
Stakeholders Share Concerns Over the Proposed Changes to CBA
 
Private coal companies and civil society groups have flagged key concerns about the 2024 draft amendments to the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, warning they could deepen the displacement of tribal and vulnerable communities. In documents accessed through RTI, stakeholders share key concerns like while the bill aligns with the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, it excludes safeguards like community consent and social impact assessments. Corporates like Hindalco and Tata Steel caution against social unrest and project delays due to unclear timelines for land denotification. Experts fear the bill may weaken acquisition safeguards, divert restoration land to private use, and sideline community rights. Read the whole report by Sukriti Vats.

­Illegal Mining in Ganga Floodplain: What the New Probe Reveals and Overlooks
 
A Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) report submitted to the Uttarakhand High Court confirms rampant illegal mining along the Ganga floodplain in Haridwar, despite a 2022 ban. The case, based on a petition by Haridwar’s Matri Sadan, flagged violations between Raiwala and Bhogpur. CPCB found 53 stone crushers: 22 without valid permits, 10 within 1 km of the Ganga (against state policy), and signs of unauthorised extraction, including deep pits in the flood zone. Matri Sadan criticised the report for excluding sites, petitioner consultation, and relying on limited data, exposing enforcement gaps and weak regulatory accountability. Read the report by Sukriti Vats.

New In Our Database

The Land Conflict Watch database is now tracking 993 ongoing disputes. In August alone, researchers added 16 new conflicts and updated 25 ongoing conflicts. Given below are some patterns:
 
Some unique new developments. In Karnataka, farmers are protesting the ₹1,000 crore Hemavathi Express Link Canal project that would divert water to the neighbouring district. In Madhya Pradesh, concerns over construction of a cricket stadium has led to judicial intervention triggering a tree census.
 
There have been 4 new conflicts related to evictions and displacement. In Chhattisgarh’s Ambikapur, an anti-encroachment demolition displaced 60 families at Mahamaya Hill. Similarly, residents of Okhla in Delhi faced demolition notices amid ownership disputes, while the lack of recognised land rights triggered forced evictions around Chandola Lake in Gujarat impacting nearly 31,000 people. 
 
At the same time, we’ve seen 5 conflicts around infrastructure and development projects. Some which have led to resistance from communities. Farmers in Buxar, Bihar resisted land acquisition for a thermal power plant over unfair compensation, while communities in the Western Ghats opposed the Kaiga nuclear plant expansion. There are new updates in Telangana’s Lagacharla village, High Court has put a stay on the land acquisition for an industrial park, which was challenged over lack of consent and procedural lapses. 
 
Environmental concerns have also been raised by stakeholders. In Gujarat’s Gir region, communities opposed eco-sensitive zone notifications around the protected forest, while in Valsad, religious claims over forest land clashed with legal authority. In the Northeast, we have updates on conflicts where communities demand inquiry of stakeholders involved in the illegal coal mining in Assam’s Dehing Patkai, and 1000 villagers rallied in Geku against 12 hydropower projects in Arunachal Pradesh, an ongoing conflict since 1972 which has impacted approximately 150,000 people.
 
In Meghalaya, there have been border and jurisdictional disputes simmering in Maikhuli village in Meghalaya, where fishery rights were contested amid boundary settlement talks. 
 
We have updates on conflicts, revealing how** commons are tied to identity and livelihoods**. Dalit communities in Tumakuru, Karnataka continue to face discrimination in access to burial grounds. Despite fisherfolk opposition in Goa’s River Sal, dredging continues. Taluka Development Officer shares that 1,700 bighas of grazing land has been allotted after nearly 3 years of protesting from Maldhari pastoralists in Meghavadia, Gujarat.
 
Finally, in urban areas like Bengaluru, street vendors clashed with municipal authorities during eviction drives that impacted 70,000 people. In Mysuru, farmers resisted agricultural land acquisition for transmission lines, a project worth ₹42,228 crore.

Law in Focus

 
Dima Hasao: Tribal Rights Undermined by Land Allotment
 
On 12 August 2025, the Gauhati High Court heard two writ petitions in Sonesh Hojai and Others v. State of Assam, challenging the allotment of 3,000 bighas in Dima Hasao for a cement factory. While the company claimed the land was allotted through a tender-based mining lease, the local community argued they faced unlawful eviction despite long-term possession. The Court noted the scale of the allotment was “extraordinary” and sought policy records from the North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council. Stressing Dima Hasao’s Sixth Schedule protections and Umrangso’s ecological importance, it highlighted the need to safeguard tribal rights. The next hearing is on 1 September 2025.
 
Rehabilitation Policies Not to Appease Public But for the Truly Displaced
 
In Estate Officer HUDA v. Nirmala Devi, the Supreme Court held that rehabilitation beyond monetary compensation is not mandatory in all land acquisition cases. The dispute arose under Haryana’s 1992 policy granting alternate plots to landowners. The Court clarified that when land is acquired for public purpose, landowners are entitled only to fair compensation under law. Rehabilitation should apply only in exceptional cases where people lose both residence and livelihood, becoming destitute. It cautioned that unnecessary state rehabilitation policies, like Haryana’s, often cause administrative complications and litigation. The ruling serves as a reminder to governments to avoid such measures.

­Support Our Work
 
If you like our research and what we do at Land Conflict Watch, we’d like to draw your attention to our community membership plan. With our tailored plans, members can access special in-depth reports, policy briefs, curated expert talks, and behind-the-scenes interactions with our writers. It is your support that allows us to document and study the issues that impact the lives of millions in India. To support our work, please consider becoming a member by clicking here.

Editor,
Vasudha Varadarajan
Creative Content Editor