In 2018, Sahariya families of Binega village, located on the outskirts of Madhav National Park of Shivpuri District, unexpectedly found themselves involved in a legal battle to claim the right to adequate housing. The village is home to about 60 Sahariya families, a tribal community which has been recognised as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG) by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, making them eligible for government schemes aimed at their upliftment, including those for housing such as PM-AWAS Gramin and PM-JANMAN.
Previously, in 2010, a Community Forest Rights (CFR) title was vested in Gram Sabha members of the village, while some 34 people were granted Individual Forest Rights (IFR) in 2017. A few of the villagers had also been found eligible for grants under Pradhan Mantri AWAS-Gramin in 2016, as they started receiving instalments under the housing scheme and building their homes.
In 2017, the tribal families were dragged in a conflict, when the local Forest Department flagged the Shri Paramhans Ashram as an encroachment under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. It stated that the Ashram had encroached upon 11.50 hectares of community forest land, parts of which were held by the villagers of Binega. After a show-cause notice was issued, Swami Pathranand Maharaj approached the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Gwalior Bench) in 2018, alleging that it was the villagers who violated the law by encroaching upon the community forest land. The High Court issued a status quo order, leading to abeyance of construction of "pucca" houses by the villagers. Further, the Maharaj also initiated parallel proceedings before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which, in 2019, directed the State Authorities to remove the houses being constructed by the villagers, prompting the latter to approach the Supreme Court of India.
In May 2015, the Union government had submitted that Swami Bajranand was included in the CFR title alongside the Gram Sabha members. As per the law, only the name of Gram Sabha, and not individuals, is mentioned in the CFR title. This triggered the district authorities to initiate the process to remove the name of Swami Bajranand as well as "review" IFR titles.
However, the legal battle before courts underscored the collision of two values: forest conservation vis-à-vis human rights and livelihood. During a court hearing, the Tribal Affairs Ministry said that Swami Pathranand’s forest violations were "self-explanatory" and that the villagers held the land under IFR titles, and they were entitled to benefits under the AWAS scheme "an extension of their recognised rights under the FRA".
The Supreme Court, on 23 September 2025, observed that there is conflict between the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. It noted that the 1980 law provides for strict rigours for diversion of forest land for any non-forest purpose except for the approval of Central Government. However, the Forest Rights Act 2006 under Section 3(2) empowers the Central Government to divert forest land for providing certain specified facilities to the forest dwellers, as enlisted, notwithstanding the Conservation Law. Critically, the specified activities for such exemption does not include construction of pucca dwelling house, the court noted.
Considering the submissions and position of law, the court directed the MoEFCC and Tribal Affairs Ministry to strike convergence between the two laws. The outcome is likely to affect the implementation of other government schemes such as PM-JANMAN and DAJGUA targeted to uplift Schedule Tribes and PVTG habitations.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand for better access to common land/resources
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand to allow forest dwellers to construct pucca houses within the forest under the PM AWAS-Gramin programme.
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common
Forest
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Other environmental services, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value, Residential area
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws
Legislations/Policies Involved
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
Yes
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Pending
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Supreme Court of India
Case Number
Civil Appeal No. 2590 of 2019
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Judicial harassment
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change; Ministry of Tribal Affairs, State of Madhya Pradesh through its Forest Department; District Collector Shivpuri; Conservator of Forest, Shivpuri; District Coordinator, Tribal Welfare, Shivpuri; Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Shivpuri
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
No
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Sahariya-Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG); Shri Paramhans Ashram
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?
