Since they were appointed guardians of the Amrit Mahal Kaval grassland in Challakere in Chitradurga district by Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan, the agricultural and shepherding communities in the region have been preserving this ecologically important zone. They were given land here by the erstwhile rulers to cultivate on the condition that they look after the Amrit Mahal breed of cattle, which was of strategic importance in battles and, hence, in sustaining empires. These grasslands were intimately connected to the communities' culture and livelihoods.

But the grasslands were never officially recognised by the Government of India, which denoted the commons (thousands of acres of grasslands available for common use) as degraded forests, stripping them of the protection accorded to forestlands. This made it easy for the government to divert these lands for developmental and industrial purposes without the need to set up forest rights committees or without seeking the consent of the Gram Sabhas.

Since 2009, nearly 10,000 acres of the Amrit Mahal Kaval grasslands have been diverted to several strategic and defence institutions, such as the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Indian Space Research Organisation, Indian Institute of Science and Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). The herding communities only became aware of the problem in 2011 when walls started to be built around the demarcated lands and they found themselves losing access to their grazing grounds.

Before 2011, there were three lakh livestock in the 60 villages in the region. But once they started losing access to the grasslands, most of the herders were forced to sell their cattle as they were no longer able to feed them.

A private solar company, which has been allocated 1,200 acres of land, has allegedly destroyed hundreds of check dams built inside the grasslands, resulting in the lakes drying up. As a result, the population is now dependent on groundwater, which is allegedly contaminated with fluoride.

The administration had subverted crucial laws, such as the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, to legitimise the diversion. The Act determines how many acres of grasslands are needed for certain breeds of cattle. The cattle census was also reportedly fudged. Leo Saldanha of the Bengaluru-based Environment Support Group (ESG), which has been fighting for the protection of the commons, told LCW that the number of cattle on paper was barely 10 percent of the actual number, and it was demonstrated that the grasslands were in surplus. When the village residents approached the Karnataka High Court in 2011, their case was dismissed, and they were fined Rs 70,000. Their appeal was subsequently rejected by the Supreme Court too.

When Saldanha approached the National Green Tribunal (NGT), the latter said the various ventures could go ahead, subject to stringent environmental clearances, considering there were plans by BARC to enrich uranium. The organisations had to comply with two-stage clearances -- receive consent for establishing their industry as well as consent for conducting their operations. In February 2014, the NGT stayed all activity until the clearances were produced. While the parties maintained that they had the necessary clearance certificates, they refused to release them citing the Official Secrets Act, 1923.

Petitioners like ESG then moved the Central Information Commission (CIC). In a landmark directive, the CIC noted that when it comes to the matter of lives and the environment, defence cannot be used as an excuse to deny information. Despite this, there continued to be resistance. "BARC gave us a two-page clearance copy with most of the information redacted," Saldanha said. With further appeals, the ESG could finally gain access to all the clearances -- almost 3,500 pages of documents.

Another public interest litigation was filed challenging the diversion of 61 acres for the construction of canals under the Upper Bhadra project. The petitioner contended that the Amrit Mahal Kaval grassland is part of the conservation reserve notified under Section 36-A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, and cannot be allotted to Visvesvaraya Jala Nigam Limited for its project. In July 2020, the Karnataka High Court issued notice to the state.

In February 2022, the Karnataka High Court summoned the Principal Secretary of Forest Department to appear in person, for non-compliance of the directions regarding removal of encroachments from Amrit Mahal Kaval grasslands. The court was hearing a PIL filed in 2016 by Wildlife Conservation Action Team and three others. The court referred to its order dated 5 March 2020, where the alleged encroachment of the conservation reserve land was recorded in detail.

In its order, the court had also directed the Principal Secretary to the Forest Department to look into whether the Special Task Force constituted as per its order in 2018 is functioning. The Principal Secretary was directed to file the affidavit by 31 March 2020. However, the bench observed that the respondents kept on taking time to file the compliance affidavit. “From the perusal compliance affidavit filed on 26 November 2021, we are not at all satisfied with respect to the steps taken for removal of the alleged encroachments,” the bench said.