1 | Page Forest Rights Act: Lessons from the Field Ritambhara Hebbar Centre for Study of Developing Societies Tata Institute of Social Sciences Mumbai Introduction Does the Forest Rights Act really redress historical injustice, and more importantly, what constitutes historical injustice in relation to forest dwellers? It is essential to return to these questions, as FRA brought in great hope for forest dwellers that it would respect their association with the forest. Even policy makers have celebrated it as a paradigm shift. To quote the Joint Secretary, Ashok Pai, Ministry of Tribal Affairs (Khanna. Ed. 2015: 1), The FRA has brought a paradigm shift in the forest law which has existed for almost one and half centuries, bringing the people ‘who were “offenders”, into their rightful place as right holders. From “encroachers” who needed to be “evicted” the forest dwellers have been recognised as “integral to the very survival and sustainability of the forest ecosystem”. The chasm which separated forest dwelling communities from such rightful place has been recognised as the “historical injustice” which the FRA sets out to correct. How can this gap that separates forest dwellers from their rightful place be filled? What is their rightful place? Is the paradigm shift supported by changes in the institutional processes and practices that dominate forest areas? In a piece titled Righting the Wrongs done to India’s Forest Dwellers , Madhu Sarin writes (2008: 10), A national ‘Campaign for Survival & Dignity’ was spearheaded by a loose federation of grassroots organizations against forest evictions, drawing in other grassroots and political bodies. Their campaign work culminated in the enactment of The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. …the new law has several radical provisions. It admits the historical injustice done to India’s tribal and other traditional forest dwelling communities due to their land and forest rights not being recognized during the consolidation of state forests. Sarin’s argument has been that there are thousands of illegal occupants of forestland who are threatened of eviction on a regular basis by the forest departments and by