Community Forest Resource (CFR) Management

Context

Gram panchayats in over 10 districts of Chhattisgarh are protesting a State Forest Department order suspending all Community Forest Resource (CFR) management activities under the Forest Rights Act, 2006. The move has sparked concerns over infringement of tribal rights and jurisdictional conflict with the Tribal Welfare Department.

Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA):

Recognizes the rights of forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers to forest resources.
Section 3(1)(i) provides for the right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource (CFR).
Gram Sabha is the statutory authority for initiating the process of determining rights under FRA.

Community Forest Resource (CFR):

CFR refers to customary forest areas traditionally used by communities for livelihood and cultural practices.
Under Rule 4(1)(e) of the FRA Rules, 2012, the gram sabha is empowered to manage CFRs and prepare conservation and management plans.

Controversy in Chhattisgarh:

The Forest Department’s order prohibits any CFR-related activity by either government or private entities.
Protesters argue this order contradicts the FRA, which vests forest management authority in the gram sabha and the Tribal Welfare Department—not the Forest Department.
Allegations suggest an attempt to centralize control over forests, contrary to community-based governance envisioned by FRA.

Conflict of Administrative Jurisdiction:

The Tribal Welfare Department is the designated nodal agency for FRA implementation.
The Forest Department’s attempt to act as the nodal department has been termed illegal and ultra vires by civil society groups.
This raises broader questions on the bureaucratic resistance to decentralization and community forest governance.

Constitutional and Legal Backing:

The PESA Act, 1996 also strengthens the role of gram sabhas in Scheduled Areas regarding natural resource management.
Judicial interpretations, including in Orissa Mining Corporation v. Ministry of Environment & Forests (2013), reaffirmed the primacy of gram sabha consent in forest matters.