Nilgiris Biosphere Reserve - Equitable Tourism Options

The centre has recently passed a law recognising "adivasi panchayats and
self governance" (The Constitutional Provisions relating to Panchayats
(Part IX of the Constitution) Extension to the Scheduled Areas Bill 1996).
The law was passed on 24 December 1996. This law apart from
recognising adivasi self-governance deals with the issue of land alienation
and prevents the same if it contradicts and is not in consonance with the
cultural base and traditions of Adivasi communities. The law also
recognises customary rights over natural resources. The World Bank ecodevelopment
projects and eco-tourist opportunists like the Taj group violate
the spirit ofthis Act as it directly threatens their rights over natural resources
and preserving their cultural identity, traditions and their homeland.
Adivasis of Nagarhole have started working on getting this operationalised
and simultaneously their peoples' plan for protection oftheir culture and the
environment of their homeland is underway. The adivasis are reclaiming
their homeland, reclaiming their jam mas (community commons), reviving
their cultural identity, planning regeneration using their traditional wisdom
and restoring the area to what it was in the time oftheir ancestors.
The Taj group has approached the Supreme Court against the High Court
Order. The case is still pending for final orders. But in the meanwhile the
Central government has stepped into the scene quite emphatically. In a
letter on May 28, 1998, Chief Conservator of Forest of the Ministry of
Environment and Forests (Central Government) Mr. Saxena directed the
state government to reclaim the land leased out to Taj group within 45 days .
The Centre also sought a report in 60 days from the state government on
the action taken against the officers involved in leasing the land to the hotel
group. "The responsibility for the violation of the Act should be fixed and
action taken or proposed to be taken against the concerned officers be
reported within 60 days" the Chief Conservator Mr. Saxena observed. The
letter also pointed out various incongruities of the Karnataka Government's
actions for example, 'factually incorrect' claim made in the High Court that
some forest officials have accommodated the hotel in the forest area
implying that the state government was not fully aware of the goings-on;
non-consideration of the warning of Karnataka Forest Development
Corporation (KFDC) that the Central Government's approval was
necessary to lease the forest land for private ventures, that the court was
'kept in the dark' of the constructions made by KFDC between 1986 and
1 989, and so on. The letter goes on to state that the guidelines of Ministry of
, Nilagiris : Fading Glory
44 . _.