Eviction Drive in Goalpara: A Complex Tale of Environmental Conservation and Human Cost
Eviction Operation in Paikan Reserve Forest
On Saturday morning, the administration of Goalpara, along with the Forest department, executed a significant eviction operation in the Paikan Reserve Forest. This initiative aimed to reclaim 1,032 bighas (approximately 138 hectares) of forest land that had been encroached upon, as part of ongoing efforts to restore biodiversity in protected ecological areas.
The operation resulted in the eviction of 1,080 families from critical locations such as Bidyapara and Betbari. This event not only highlighted the urgent need for environmental conservation but also underscored the human impact of such actions.
Established in 1982, the Paikan Reserve Forest has faced encroachment for many years, with families residing there for generations. The eviction was facilitated by the Assam Forest Regulation of 1891, which empowers forest authorities to remove unauthorized occupants from reserve forest areas. This action was prompted by a suo moto Public Interest Litigation from the Gauhati High Court, calling for immediate measures against forest encroachments.
While the eviction in Paikan was largely peaceful, with around 70 percent of residents voluntarily leaving after receiving notices, it raises complex questions about the State's eviction policies over the past year.
Key issues arise: If families have lived on this land for decades, receiving government benefits such as housing and electricity, how can they suddenly be labeled as 'illegal encroachers'? How does the State justify demolishing homes it once recognized through its schemes? This situation reveals a significant contradiction in governance. If these settlements were unauthorized, why did the authorities allow them to exist for so long?
Another concerning aspect of these operations is the selective enforcement of eviction policies. While the government is actively addressing encroachments in certain areas, vast regions in Kaziranga, Sonai Rupai, and other reserve forests in Guwahati and Pobitora remain encroached. These areas pose serious threats to the State's biodiversity and ecological integrity.
Despite the ongoing environmental risks, the government's leniency in these regions raises questions. If the aim is to restore and protect the environment, why is there no consistent enforcement across all ecologically sensitive areas? This inconsistency is troubling. For genuine commitment to environmental conservation, a uniform policy must be applied across all regions, rather than selectively targeting specific areas. The lack of such an approach fosters perceptions of selective justice, exacerbating existing social and political divides, and raises concerns about potential biases—whether political or demographic—affecting these decisions.