Nicobarese tribal leaders ‘not necessary or proper parties’ in Great Nicobar forest rights case: Centre tells Calcutta HC

The Great Nicobar forest-rights case examines whether authorities legally recognised forest rights before allowing forest land to be diverted for a major development project. Former IAS officer Meena Gupta filed the public interest litigation. It challenges the constitution of the Sub-Divisional Level Committee, recorded Gram Sabha proceedings, and the forest-rights certificate issued on August 18, 2022.

The certificate followed meetings said to have involved Gram Sabhas in Campbell Bay, Laxmi Nagar and Govind Nagar on August 12, 2022. The case questions whether these meetings represented the Nicobarese community and whether the Forest Rights Act process was properly completed. Four Nicobarese representatives say their community did not give informed consent.

The dispute matters because the certificate helped clear the way for the proposed Great Nicobar project. The Centre says the certificate was issued after due process. The High Court has scheduled the next hearing for November 25 and 26, so the court’s assessment may affect how the project proceeds.

The Centre’s main argument is that the four representatives are not essential to deciding the legal challenge. It says their interests were already represented by official respondents and that the Tribal Council had representation on the Sub-Divisional Level Committee. On that basis, it argues they are neither necessary nor proper parties.

The Ministry of Tribal Affairs also objects to the timing of their application. Its affidavit says they raised no objections through the statutory channels available under the Forest Rights Act. It points to the absence of formal objections from the Tribal Council during the relevant period and says the applicants waited nearly four years after the certificate and two years after the writ petition.

The representatives dispute the underlying process. They say no Gram Sabha of the Nicobarese was convened to discuss diversion of ancestral forest land. The court must now consider both the Centre’s delay argument and whether the applicants’ direct community role makes their participation useful to the case.

India’s Forest Rights Act, 2006, provides a legal process for recognising individual and community forest rights. It is designed to record rights held by people and communities connected with forest land. The law matters here because recognition must precede decisions that affect the use or diversion of such land.

The process described in the article begins with Gram Sabhas. Claims and community concerns then move through committees at the sub-divisional and district levels. The case challenges the constitution of the Sub-Divisional Level Committee, the proceedings recorded as Gram Sabha resolutions, and the forest-rights certificate issued on August 18, 2022.

The Centre says Gram Sabhas were held in Campbell Bay, Laxmi Nagar and Govind Nagar and that the certificate followed due process. The four representatives allege that no Nicobarese Gram Sabha considered the diversion of ancestral forest land. The court’s decision will test whether the statutory process was properly followed.

The proposed Great Nicobar Island development project is unusually large in both cost and physical reach. The article places its estimated cost at ₹81,000 crore and says the planned facilities would spread across 166 square kilometres of the island. Its scale makes the forest-rights dispute consequential for development and the community.

The project includes a transhipment port, a greenfield international airport, a township and power infrastructure. These facilities would require forest land to be diverted. The forest-rights certificate issued in 2022 is therefore closely connected to whether the project has cleared an important legal step.

The project’s future remains tied to the Calcutta High Court case. The petition challenges the process behind recognition of forest rights, while the Centre defends the certificate as lawful. The next hearing is scheduled for November 25 and 26. The ruling could influence the project’s legal path and the community’s claims over ancestral areas.

The certificate matters because it records the recognition of forest rights before forest land is diverted for the Great Nicobar project. The Forest Rights Act requires a process involving Gram Sabhas and government committees. A challenge to that process is therefore also a challenge to whether the project received valid clearance to affect community forest land.

The petition contests the Sub-Divisional Level Committee’s constitution, the proceedings recorded as Gram Sabha resolutions, and the certificate issued on August 18, 2022. The Centre says Gram Sabhas met in Campbell Bay, Laxmi Nagar and Govind Nagar and that the certificate was issued after due process. Tribal representatives say no Nicobarese Gram Sabha discussed diversion of their ancestral land.

The court has not yet resolved these competing claims. Its decision could determine whether the recognition certificate stands. That outcome may affect the legal foundation for the ₹81,000-crore project, including its port, airport, township and power infrastructure.

The article states that the Nicobarese community was displaced from ancestral villages by the 2004 tsunami. It does not provide further details about the damage or the relocation process. It does make clear that returning to those villages remains an important community aim.

That history gives the forest-rights dispute a direct human dimension. The challenged certificate concerns recognition of rights over forest land that the community describes as ancestral. The four representatives say no Nicobarese Gram Sabha was convened to discuss diverting that land. They also allege that the process did not secure the community’s consent.

The proposed project could cover 166 square kilometres and include major infrastructure. If ancestral areas are used for it, the community’s ability to return could be affected. The court’s review of the 2022 certificate will therefore matter to both the project’s legal pathway and the community’s stated wish to return to ancestral villages.

A Gram Sabha is a village-level assembly. Under the Forest Rights Act process described in the article, Gram Sabhas participate in recognising individual and community forest rights before claims move through higher-level committees. Their involvement gives affected residents a formal place to raise concerns about forest land.

In this case, the Centre says Gram Sabhas in Campbell Bay, Laxmi Nagar and Govind Nagar met on August 12, 2022. The tribal representatives say no Gram Sabha of the Nicobarese was convened to discuss diversion of their ancestral forest land. Manju also says he was not told he belonged to the Sub-Divisional Level Committee until attending its meeting.

Informed participation matters because a decision about ancestral forest land can affect community rights and the possibility of returning to villages after the 2004 tsunami. The High Court must assess whether the recorded meetings represented the relevant community and whether the certificate followed the law.