"The Forest Rights Act, 2006 was meant to correct historical injustice to forest dwellers, but implementation often defeats its intent." Discuss with reference to recent eviction drives in ecologically sensitive landscapes.

The Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 was enacted to undo the "historical injustice" of colonial and post-colonial forest laws that treated forest dwellers as encroachers, vesting rights in Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers occupying forest land before 13 December 2005 [1]. Two decades on, the statute's promise survives, but its delivery is uneven.

Transformative intent of the Act

• Rights, not welfare: recognises individual, community and Community Forest Resource (CFR) rights, with the Gram Sabha as the initiating authority [1][2].
• Livelihood gains: minor forest produce rights and CFR titles have widened tribal income baskets, and a sizeable share of titles vest in women [3].

Where implementation defeats intent

• Scale of rejection: of about 51.2 lakh claims filed till 31 May 2025, roughly 49% were titled while over 36% stood rejected [4].
• Extra-statutory tests: claims are commonly refused for "inability to prove three generations of residence" — a condition the Act imposes only on OTFDs, not as a blanket bar [4][1].
• CFR neglect: community claims form a small fraction of filings, leaving collective governance rights largely unrealised [4].

Eviction drives in ecologically sensitive landscapes

• In the Agasthyamalai landscape (Tamil Nadu–Kerala), the Supreme Court directed the Central Empowered Committee to survey encroachments and non-forestry activity and ordered removal of structures, including fair price shops, schools and anganwadis [5].
• Executed before pending FRA claims are settled, such drives invert the Act's sequence: rights determination must precede displacement, since occupation recognised under FRA is not encroachment [1].

The gap is thus institutional — rights recognition rests with the Ministry of Tribal Affairs while enforcement rests with State forest departments. Time-bound suo motu review of rejected claims, mandatory FRA-settlement certification before any eviction, and Gram Sabha-led conservation can reconcile ecological security with tribal dignity, realising the Act's founding pledge.