MUMBAI: The long-running battle over rehabilitation inside Sanjay Gandhi National Park (SGNP) has intensified after the park authorities identified 16,478 families as eligible for housing under its latest survey, even as sections of the adivasi community accused officials of harassment and deliberate attempts to “confuse” residents.
The survey, conducted by M/s Grant Thornton Bharat LLP between January 2025 and early February, is the fifth such exercise to enumerate families living within the protected forest. According to officials, the exercise was aimed at identifying residents who can prove they were living inside the park prior to January 1, 1995, the cut-off date for rehabilitation eligibility.
16,478 families cleared, but more may still apply
Kiran Patil, deputy director (South) of SGNP, said the survey found 16,478 families meeting the eligibility criteria. However, the figure falls short of the park’s internal estimate of over 23,000 families residing within its boundaries.
“Many residents refused to cooperate with the surveyors and failed to provide documentation,” Patil said. “Since our estimates suggested over 23,000 families, we have asked everyone, including those not on the list, to approach us with documentary proof of having resided here before January 1, 1995.”
Officials said this is the “last opportunity” for eligible residents to claim rehabilitation housing. The list of identified families has been uploaded on the state forest department’s website and displayed at the SGNP deputy director’s office and park notice boards.
The survey agency, Patil added, has previously been associated with the implementation of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), and was tasked with specifically identifying eligible beneficiaries.
Adivasis allege harassment, distrust process
However, tribal residents have questioned the intent behind the exercise. Members of the adivasi community, many of whom have lived in forest hamlets for generations, allege that authorities have repeatedly collected documents under various pretexts while simultaneously branding them as encroachers in court proceedings.
“They take our documents again and again. They have conducted their own surveys before. Yet in court they call us encroachers and seek demolition of our homes. Now they ask us again to prove eligibility for rehabilitation,” said a resident who requested anonymity, citing fear of official retaliation.
Tensions peaked on January 27 when forest officials reportedly initiated demolition action against residents who had already claimed rehabilitation housing in Chandivali. The confrontation led to police cases being filed against 16 individuals, several of whom were also barred from their jobs associated with SGNP.
Devendra Thakur, president of the Birsa Munda Adivasi Shramik Sanghtana, alleged that authorities have imposed punitive measures affecting daily life in forest settlements.
“They disconnected BEST bus services, stopped vans that transported schoolchildren and halted vehicles used for visitor transport, affecting the livelihoods of young adivasis,” Thakur said. The group has since approached the chief minister seeking reinstatement of jobs and rehabilitation near the park’s periphery rather than relocation to distant areas.
Forest department cites High Court order
Park authorities, however, maintain that their actions are guided by judicial directives. Patil pointed to a May 7, 1997 order of the Bombay High Court, which had questioned the extension of civic facilities to encroachments inside forest land and recommended phased disconnection of services such as electricity, water and transport. “We are simply following the court’s orders,” Patil said.
Officials also noted that in earlier rehabilitation drives, around 11,336 families were resettled out of approximately 33,000 residents identified within the park.
The dispute has grown more complex with many adivasi residents filing claims under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 — commonly known as the Forest Rights Act (FRA). The law recognises land and habitation rights of forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers.
Amrita Bhattacharjee of the Aarey Conservation Group, who has worked closely with the community, said several residents have lived in SGNP settlements long before the FRA came into force in 2006 and are now seeking formal recognition of their land rights.
“These adivasis have been staying within the park long before 2006. They are now asserting rights available to them under the FRA, which the state must examine,” she said.
Patil, however, contested this position. “The FRA came into force in 2006. People cannot come two decades later to claim benefits under it,” he said.