This article talks about the inherent contradictions in the constitutional provisions, state policies, local laws and practices in regard to the rights of tribals over their natural resources which have left them marginalized, helpless and poor. According to Hobbes, in order to get security of their life and property, men (people) surrendered some of their natural rights to the state but the state in turn is acquiring more and more property of men in the name of ‘governance’ and ‘development’. This article discusses about Land being more than a commodity for the tribals, it is their identity, culture and memories of their ancestors but state’s repressive and arbitrary acts and laws have led to the displacement of tribals which have made them vulnerable to the dangers of pauperization and marginalization. The expansion of state over natural resources and forests has spearheaded the curtailment of the rights of tribals over their resources. This has created a big hiatus between the fundamental law of the land and its objectives and aspirations with regard to natural resources of its territory. The practices of state through laws and governmental machinery have been very insensitive towards the plight and marginalisation of tribals.

The concluding remarks made in this article have pointed out that land lost due to such acquisitions become irreparable for the tribals even with the provisions of rehabilitation and resettlement packages because here land is linked more to an identity than a mere commodity.


Key Words

State, Tribals, Land, PESA, CNTA, Eminent Domain, Public Purpose



State; Tribals; Land; PESA; CNTA; Eminent Domain; Public Purpose

Full Text:




Dandekar, A., & Choudhury, C. (2010). PESA, Left-wing extremism and governance: Concerns and challenges in India’s tribal districts. Report of a study commissioned by Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Government of India. Anand: Institute of Rural Management, Anand.

Downing, C. (2013). Eminent Domain in 21st Century India: What New Dehli Can Learn from New London. NYUJ Int'l L. & Pol., 46, 207.

Epstein, R. A. (1985). Takings. Harvard University Press.

Gupta, P. S. (2012). The Peculiar Circumstances of Eminent Domain in India.

Grotius, H. (1972). On the Law of War and Peace (1625). The Law of War: A Documentary History.

Hodgson, G. M. (2009). On the institutional foundations of law: the insufficiency of custom and private ordering. Journal of Economic Issues, 43(1), 143-166.

Locke, J. (1960). Peter Laslett. Two Treatises of Government,(1967: Cambridge UP, Cambridge).

Levien, M. (2013). The politics of dispossession: Theorizing India’s “land wars”. Politics & Society, 41(3), 351-394.

Ramanathan, U. (2009). A word on eminent domain. Displaced by Development: Confronting Marginalization and Gender Injustice, 133-145.

Ramanathan, U. (2011). Land acquisition, eminent domain and the 2011 bill. Economic and Political Weekly, 46(44), 10-14.

Sampat, P. (2013). The limits to absolute power. Economic and Political Weekly, 47(19), 40-52.

Singh, J. (2006). Separation of powers and the erosion of the ‘right to property’in India. Constitutional political economy, 17(4), 303-324.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.