PM Awas houses on forest land: Prior approval not required if individual forest rights recognised, Centre submits in Supreme Court

The Centre’s submissions were filed in a joint affidavit of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The affidavit was filed following the SC’s direction to the two ministries in September 2025 to hold consultations on the scope, method and manner of enabling construction of houses within the forest, keeping in mind the mandate of FCA, 1980, and the need to evolve a system where there is convergence in the working of FRA and FCA.

The FRA, 2006 recognises historical rights of Scheduled Tribes and other forest dwellers in forest areas while the FCA or Van (Samvardhan Evam Sanrakshan) Adhiniyam regulates use of forest land, including diversions for non-forestry activity. In previous filings before the SC, the Tribal Affairs Ministry had submitted that the entitlement to benefits under the PM Awas-Gramin Yojana was an extension of their recognised rights under the FRA.

The matter before the SC concerns a civil appeal and a contempt petition in relation to construction of houses under PMAY-G on forest land for a small Sahariya community belonging to the particularly vulnerable tribal group, in Binega village in Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh. The community of 63 families has appealed against an order of the National Green Tribunal, which held the PMAY-G constructions as violative of FCA. The contempt petition has been filed by one Swami Pathranand of the Paramhans Ashram, who was the petitioner in the NGT case, on grounds of non-compliance of the NGT’s orders.

Swami Pathranand had alleged that the PMAY-G houses were sanctioned on community forest land. He had also approached the Gwalior bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court to halt the construction but it was disposed of with the directions to forest officials to examine the issue. In fact, the Ashram came under a cloud for building a large bhawan and double fencing 9 hectares of CFR land from all sides.

The outcome of the case will have a bearing on implementation of government schemes, which seek to improve the socio-economic conditions of PVTGs through convergence and saturation.

In its September 23, 2025 order, the SC had said that while the FRA empowers the government to provide certain specified facilities to the forest dwellers, notwithstanding the mandate under the FC Act, 1980, exemptions under the FRA are only for activities undertaken by the government…and does not include construction of a pucca dwelling house. It had thus asked the Centre to evolve a convergence in the working of the two important laws.

The Centre, it is learnt, also added in its filing that the assessment of the factual and statutory position with regards to the case rests with the Madhya Pradesh government, which is the competent authority for the implementation of the FRA, 2006.

In an August 2025 affidavit, the Tribal Affairs Ministry had submitted that a resolution was passed by the Gram Sabha in January 2016 recommending recognition of the Individual Forest Rights for 63 tribal families in Binega village, while a community forest resource title had been granted to all members of the Gram Sabha in 2010.

In May 2015, community forest right title was also issued to Swami Bajranand Maharaj from the Ashram, alongside Gram Sabha members. A 2017 site report by the district administration, meanwhile, had also confirmed that the pucca houses were sanctioned on individual forest right titles and not community forest resource land, as alleged by the Ashram.