Tribal rights group Lok Swashasan Andolan has demanded the suspension of Madhya Pradesh's top forest official over an August 6 directive concerning community forest resource (CFR) rights claims.
The organisation alleges that the directive, which asked forest officials to receive claims from Gram Sabhas, violates provisions of the Forest Rights Act (FRA).
It argues that the Gram Sabha and statutory committees, rather than forest officials acting independently, are responsible for processing and deciding forest rights claims.
The group has also raised concerns that the directive could allow forest officials to determine which areas qualify for CFR rights, bypassing procedures prescribed under the law.
In a September 27 letter to the state's chief secretary, the organisation demanded the withdrawal of the directive and action against the official responsible for issuing it.
A tribal rights organisation in Madhya Pradesh has called for the suspension of the state’s top forest official, alleging that a directive asking forest officers to receive community forest resource (CFR) rights claims violates the Forest Rights Act (FRA).
Lok Swashasan Andolan, a platform of Adivasi and forest-dwelling organisations and other civil society groups, said the forest department had been given responsibilities that, it argues, belong to village assemblies and committees established under the law.
In a letter dated September 27, 2026 to Madhya Pradesh’s chief secretary, who also chairs the State Level Monitoring Committee under the FRA, the organisation challenged a directive issued on August 6, 2026 by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) and Head of Forest Force (HoFF).
According to the organisation, the directive instructed regional PCCFs, divisional forest officers and chief wildlife wardens of protected areas to receive CFR claims from Gram Sabhas, or village assemblies, ahead of meetings scheduled for August 15.
"The directive gives forest officials a role that they do not have under the Act," the organisation said in its letter. The group has demanded that the August 6 directive be withdrawn and that action be taken against the official responsible for issuing it.
The Forest Rights Act provides a framework for recognising the rights of forest-dwelling communities over land and forest resources. Lok Swashasan Andolan argued that the process for recognising CFR rights must follow the procedures laid down under the legislation.
According to the organisation, Gram Sabhas are responsible for receiving, consolidating, verifying and approving claims at the village level. The claims are then examined by a Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC), while a District Level Committee (DLC) makes the final decision on recognising rights and issuing titles.
The organisation alleged that the August 6 directive improperly involved forest officials in receiving, processing and deciding claims. It said forest officers could perform functions under the FRA only where they were members of the committees established under the legislation.
"All officers to whom the PCCF addresses also do not have any locus standi with reference to FRA. At best they are expected to carry out the functions of the SDLC and DLC and that too only if they are members," the letter said.
The organisation also argued that the state’s tribal welfare department, rather than the forest department, was the nodal authority responsible for implementing the legislation.
The organisation raised a separate concern about the identification of forest areas over which communities may claim CFR rights. It alleged that the directive could allow forest officials to determine where such rights apply and where they do not. The group cited Rule 13(2) of the Forest Rights Rules, which sets out evidence to be considered when determining community forest resource areas.
It also referred to Section 2(d) of the FRA, which defines community forest resource. According to the organisation, the August 6 directive risked allowing forest officials to make decisions outside the procedures prescribed by the legislation.
The group alleged that the PCCF had misrepresented the law and instructed other forest officials to act in ways that could obstruct its implementation. It described the directive as a violation of the constitutional mandate and the rule of law.
“This is a violation of the constitutional mandate and the rule of law, and an act of defiance against the constitution and the state,” the letter said. “Hence, we demand suspension of the MP PCCF and HoFF (working plan and Forest Land Records Cell) who issued the said letter and further appropriate action be taken against him for instigating other forest officials to violate the law.”
It also called for the withdrawal of the August 6 directive, describing it as unconstitutional and illegal.
