Scheduled areas—constitutionally protected regions with a high concentration of tribal population—are meant to safeguard indigenous communities’ land, culture and livelihoods.
However, the committee, chaired by Congress MP Saptagiri Sankar Ulaka (Koraput, Odisha), found that land is frequently acquired in these areas without meaningful consent, adequate social impact assessments or proper rehabilitation.
Mint explains why the committee has called for strict enforcement of the LARR Act and what it has recommended.
The LARR Act was enacted on 26 September 2013. It has provisions to provide fair compensation to those whose land is taken away, bring transparency to the process of land acquisition for setting up factories, buildings, and infrastructure projects, and ensure rehabilitation of those affected.
Under the Act, land acquisition must be preceded by a social impact assessment (SIA) to evaluate the effects on livelihoods and communities. It mandates consent of affected families for private projects and public–private partnership projects. It provides enhanced compensation up to four times the market value in rural areas and twice in urban areas. It also includes provisions for rehabilitation and resettlement, such as housing, employment and annuities.
A key concern, highlighted in the report, is the frequent bypassing of consent provisions.
Under the Act, acquiring land in scheduled areas requires prior, informed consent of the gram sabha. However, the panel noted that in several cases, projects have been approved without genuine consultations or with manipulated consent processes, thereby undermining local self-governance.
The panel also flagged large-scale acquisition for mining, industrial and infrastructure projects in these areas. Such projects often result in the displacement of tribal families, loss of forest access, environmental degradation and erosion of traditional livelihoods.
Inadequate social impact assessments further worsen the problem, as the long-term effects on tribal communities are not fully evaluated before clearances are granted. Another major issue identified is deficient rehabilitation and compensation.
The panel found that displaced families frequently face delays in compensation payments, a lack of alternative livelihood options and incomplete resettlement measures. This pushes already vulnerable tribal households into economic distress and deepens inequality.
The committee cited several regions where compliance was found wanting.
Lakshadweep: Authorities argued that enclosing or reclaiming foreshore reef flats, beaches, or lagoon edges does not amount to acquisition since the land is government-owned. The committee disagreed, noting that the act expressly protects livelihoods dependent on government and common land.
It recommended strict implementation of provisions of the act without dilution or procedural bypass, so that any project reclaiming government coastal or lagoon land first conducts a proper social impact assessment listing all livelihood users.
Great Nicobar: According to the committee, all people whose livelihoods depend on forests, coasts, creeks, reefs and commons must be treated as “affected families," even where land is recorded as government or forest land.
Odisha: The commitee also highlighted cases where land has been acquired for mining and other activities.
According to the 2011 Census, India’s scheduled tribe population stands at about 10.45 crore, or 8.6% of the total population, spread across more than 700 distinct groups. These communities are concentrated in states such as Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Odisha and the Northeast, often in ecologically sensitive and remote regions.
There is a need for strict implementation of the Act in scheduled areas because these regions are predominantly inhabited by tribal communities whose livelihoods, culture and identity are closely linked to land.
Scheduled areas enjoy special protection under the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution to prevent exploitation and alienation of tribal land. Strict enforcement of the LARR Act ensures transparent procedures, fair compensation, proper social impact assessments and effective rehabilitation.
It also helps reduce conflicts, protect constitutional safeguards and promote inclusive, rights-based development in scheduled areas.
The panel is of the view that development must be rights-based and inclusive, and not extractive or coercive. The committee recommended strict enforcement of land acquisition laws, especially in scheduled areas, to protect tribal rights and uphold constitutional safeguards.
The committee also called for mandatory and genuine gram sabha consent and cautioned against dilution or bypassing of community consultations. It recommended strengthening social impact assessments to properly assess displacement, livelihood loss and environmental consequences before project approvals.
The panel also urged governments to ensure timely and adequate compensation, along with effective rehabilitation and resettlement for affected families. It also recommended that the Ministry set up a central monitoring mechanism to assess the functionality of LARRAs, with particular focus on the speed of dispute resolution, enforcement of compensation, and rehabilitation.
Moreover, recognising the long-term economic vulnerability of farm families whose agricultural land is acquired, particularly for revenue-generating commercial or industrial projects, the committee recommended insertion of a new provision for establishing a mandatory community stake and profit-sharing mechanism.
Although the Act, 2013, provides strong legal safeguards for land acquisition in tribal and scheduled areas, its provisions are often ignored in practice, said Vijay Kuzur, a social activist and associated with the Hamari Parampara, Hamari Virasat program in Jharkhand, which aims to integrate tribal heritage into the nation’s cultural and governance framework.