INTRODUCTION
The term tribal means a social group of human beings who owes a common ancestor. Over the period anthropologist have extended the concept of the term and include tribal as ‘Primitive Group’ who shares some common identity, customs, language, territory and ancestry. Some scholar has termed it as the process of political consciousness at the time when there was no systematic centralised or governance system to resolved disputes and decision making. Tribal population comprises of over 300 million or 4 % of the world population according to the (ILO, 1989). The International Labour Organization (ILO) in the ‘Indigenous Peoples Convention of 1989’; defined the term “Tribal” to refer “peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions by special laws or regulations.” (ILO,1994). Under article 342 of the Indian Constitution empowered the President of India by consultation with the governor of the state or the Union territory, identify and notify any community or group or part of communities to declare as the schedule tribe. So under constitution it provides the term tribal instead of Indigenous. However both the term can be used synonymous in the national context.
Tribal rights over land do not originate from any external authority rather, they emerge from the historical presence of Indigenous peoples on their ancestral lands and from their enduring socio-political, cultural, and legal institutions. In Indigenous worldviews, land is not merely a property. It embodies a holistic reality that integrates cultural identity, kinship networks, ecological interdependence, spiritual beliefs, and normative legal orders. Land is understood as the total environment—comprising soil, water, air, and all forms of life that coexists within these interconnected ecosystems. As scholars Bonita Lawrence and Enakshi Dua emphasize through historical analysis, the “alienation of Indigenous peoples from their territories constitutes an attempt to undermine their inherent sovereignty”.1
Objectives of the Paper:
1. To critically examine the socio-cultural significance of land among the Indigenous communities of Arunachal Pradesh.
2. To explore the cultural transition from communal to private land ownership and its impact on tribal cohesion and territorial integrity.
3. To analyze the legal and customary mechanisms governing the acquisition and transfer of land in Arunachal Pradesh.
Methodology:
This study employs a mixed-method approach to legal research, combining both doctrinal and non-doctrinal (empirical) methodologies to ensure analytical depth and contextual relevance. The doctrinal method involves critical examination of statutes, legal principles, and scholarly literature, including the Arunachal Pradesh (Land Settlement and Records) Act, 2000, the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, Forest Rights Act 2006 and international instruments like the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The empirical component is based on structured interviews conducted with key stakeholders to gather primary data on customary land practices and indigenous perspectives. Secondary sources include government records, official websites, books, and academic journals, all used to substantiate and triangulate the findings.
A BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
The vivid chronicles of Arunachal Pradesh is gloomy and obscure due to lack of written documents. Despite, the rich cultural diversity only a limited number of ethnographic studies have systematically explored the origin, migration, and linguistic affiliations of its indigenous tribes. The state is home to over a hundred distinct tribes and sub-tribes, many of whom are believed to be affiliated with the so-called “North Assam group” of the Tibeto-Burmese linguistic family. Prof. S.K. Chatterjee, in his commentary on the Sino-Tibetan Mongoloid expansion, stated that Mongoloid tribes originally inhabiting western China were gradually displaced southward into the region between the Huang-Ho and Yangtse Kiang rivers during prehistoric times.2 In terms of racial classification, these tribes have been variously described as Indo-Mongoloid, Paleo-Mongoloid, and Proto-Mongoloid, reflecting both their phenotypic traits and migratory histories. Ethnographic and oral traditions suggest that tribes inhabiting the central belt of the state—such as the Adis, Mishmis, Nyishis, Tagins, and Apatanis—migrated from regions of southern Tibet.3 It is widely believed that the earliest wave of migration occurred in this central zone, establishing foundational settlements that later expanded outward. Archaeological excavations at Parsi-Parlo in the KurungKumey district have revealed a Protolithic phase accompanied by Neolithic tools in the uppermost strata. These findings suggest a cultural horizon dating back to at least 1000 BCE.4 However, due to the absence of scientific dating techniques such as radiocarbon (C14) or thermoluminescence (TL) analysis, the precise chronology of Neolithic culture in the region remains indeterminate. Subsequent migratory waves brought Mahayana Buddhist tribes—namely the Monpas, Sherdukpens, Membas, and Khambas—from Tibet into the western and northern parts of the state. These groups are believed to have arrived after the central settlers. On the other hand, the Theravada Buddhist tribes, including the Khamtis and Singphos, migrated from Burma into the eastern part of Arunachal Pradesh during the late medieval period, around the 18th century. And tribes such as the Tangsas, Wanchos, and Noctes are said to have migrated from Burma in the early 13th century CE, following the arrival of the Ahoms to Assam.5
Land and Socio-cultural Life
The land has significant important for the tribal’s, they have symbolic relationships with land, water, mountains, streams, rivers and valleys. Their livelihood and lifestyle are tied up with the land in a system of mutual Reinforcement – as a moral contact where social living and negotiation with human and non-living, animate beings are basically attuned to the sonic and sensual rhythms of the earth. (Roy Burman, 1992). Every person is believed to owned land in the tribal societies because land is the free gift of nature, and it should be available and accessible to all sections of society. Since time immoral the status of person in the society was determined by number of livestock’s, a number of wives (especially in Nyishi tribe), number of Slaves and stretch of land owned by the person. The amount of land possess by the person defines his position in the community. A Landless man or the people without permanent abode are regarded as stranded refugee of no social status in the eye of community.
Most importantly, the festivals and religious rituals of the tribes demonstrate a profound interconnection between people and the land. The mountains, streams, rivers, and forests are not merely geographical features but have deep spiritual value. During ceremonial chants, high priests call upon the spirits of nature, invoking their benevolent or malevolent presence to ensure harmony between human existence and the environment.
The majority population in the state is an agrarian, and their lifeline sustained by the prosperity of the land, which is celebrated through ritual festivals that affirm the rhythm of cultivation and harvest. Festivals such as Dree of the Apatanis, Moh-Mol of the Tangsas, Nyokum of the Nyishi, Mopin of the Galos, and Reh of the Idu Mishmis are not mere communal gatherings but acts of sacred dialogue with nature.6 Each marks either the commencement or the completion of agricultural cycles. It symbolises the celebration of abundance and continuity of human survival through the fertility of the soil. These festivals embody the belief that the earth and the spirits dwelling in its rivers and mountains are the custodians of wealth, livelihood, and social well-being. The genealogy of all tribes begins with the creation of the world, it begins with soil, and the soil is believed to be the matrimonial home of Abotani (the mythological father) wife’s, the goddess of all prosperity and good harvest was. Hence, the community assumes a moral duty to preserve cosmic balance by propitiating these forces through offerings and sacrifices.
LAND RIGHTS AND TRIBAL SOCIETIES
Indigenous people regard land rights as the inalienable rights possess by virtue of being born as human being and this right have been passed down to them by their ancestor. Tribal rights over their land are unspoken, unwritten customary law which is understand and respected mutually by the members of the societies. For tribal people, land is their history, their livelihood, their source of strength and their identity but over the world they are the most vulnerable and underprivileged sections of the societies, who lived and are living in isolation and dormant from mainstream world. In order to protect and safeguard their rights the International Labour Organisation adopted Convention 107 “Concerning the Protection and Integration of Indigenousand Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries” was established with the collaboration of the United Nations, Food and Agricultural Organisation, World Health Organisation and United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation. In 1989 the (General Conference of the ILO revised Convention 107 and adopted Convention 169 “Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries” (Ibarra, 1993:133-134). The Conventions have recognized the control of ancestral lands as the most important issue for the continued survival of indigenous and tribal peoples. Part –II of Indigenous and tribal people conventions, No. 169 of 1989 from article 13 to article 19 dealt with reorganization of the cultural and spiritual connections of Indigenous people with land and its territories and it goes to define the meaning of land, procedure to protect and preserved their land rights. For instance, Article 14 provides that “The rights of ownership and possession of the peoples concerned over the lands which they traditionally occupy shall be recognized. In addition, measures shall be taken in appropriate cases to safeguard the right of the peoples concerned to use lands not exclusively occupied by them, but to which they have traditionally had access for their subsistence and traditional activities. Particular attention shall be paid to the situation of nomadic peoples and shifting cultivators in this respect”.7
THE SCHEDULED TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS) ACT, 2006
This Act represents a landmark legislative intervention aimed at redressing the historical injustices inflicted upon forest-dependent communities in India. The FRA seeks to restore land tenure security and customary access rights through a rights-based framework. The Act not only vests individual and community forest rights but also acknowledges the ecological stewardship traditionally exercised by these communities, thereby integrating conservation with livelihood security. Scholars have emphasized that the FRA marks a paradigmatic shift in Indian forest law by transforming forest dwellers from “encroachers” into “right holders,” thereby challenging the legacy of centralized forest management (Springate-Baginski et al., 2019).8 This legislative recognition of customary tenure is particularly significant in regions like Northeast India, where oral traditions and community-based landholding systems have long coexisted with statutory legal regimes.
What are the Forest Rights under the Act?
Section 3(1) of the Act provides following rights:
(a) “right to hold and live in the forest land under the individual or common occupation for habitation or for self-cultivation for livelihood by a member or members of a forest dwelling Scheduled Tribe or other traditional forest dwellers;
(b) community rights such as nistar;
(c) right of ownership, access to collect, use, and dispose of minor forest produce which has been traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries;
(d) other community rights of uses or entitlements such as fish and other products of water bodies, grazing (both settled or transhumant) and traditional seasonal resource access of nomadic or pastoralist communities;
(e) rights including community tenures of habitat and habitation for primitive tribal groups and pre-agricultural communities;
(f) rights in or over disputed lands under any nomenclature in any State where claims are disputed;
(g) (g) rights for conversion of Pattas or leases or grants issued by any local authority or any State Government on forest lands to titles;
(h) rights of settlement and conversion of all forest villages, old habitation, unsurveyed villages and other villages in forests, whether recorded, notified or not into revenue villages;
(i) right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use;
(j) rights which are recognised under any State law or laws of any Autonomous District Council or Autonomous Regional Council or which are accepted as rights of tribals under any traditional or customary law of the concerned tribes of any State
(k) Right of access to biodiversity and community right to intellectual property and traditional knowledge related to biodiversity and cultural diversity;.
(l) Includes other traditional rights customarily enjoyed, excluding hunting, trapping, or extraction of wild animal parts, thereby balancing customary use with conservation mandates.
(m) Guarantees in situ rehabilitation or alternative land for those illegally evicted or displaced from forest land prior to 13 December 2005, addressing historical dispossession through remedial entitlement.9
A forest right conferred under section 3 (1) shall be heritable but not alienable or transferable, the rights cannot be alienate by way of sale, exchange or gifts and shall be registered jointly in the name of both the spouses in case of married persons and For households headed by a single individual, the registration shall be in the name of that person and in the absence of any direct heir, the right shall devolve upon the next-of-kin.10
CUSTOMARY LAND TENURE AND THE LIMITS OF DISPLACEMENT POLICY IN ARUNACHAL PRADESH
The Forest Act and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR) address issues of resettlement, alternative packages, and the provision of adequate and fair compensation. However, in Arunachal Pradesh, forest and jungle lands are not merely physical assets measurable in monetary terms; rather, the relationship with land transcends material value and encompasses deep cultural, spiritual, and ancestral significance. They are intricately embedded within the customary legal frameworks of clans, villages, and tribes. These lands are demarcated through oral tradition and intergenerational consensus, forming the basis of Indigenous governance, subsistence agriculture, and cultural identity. Displacement of entire communities or major village populations from such ancestral territories—despite the provision of compensation and resettlement—raises profound legal and ethical concerns. For instance, the Adi tribe in East Siang district prohibits the sale of land to individuals outside their tribe, the Apatani tribe of Lower Subansiri district forbids the transfer of land by any means to persons not belonging to their tribe. In addition, many clan-based associations have enacted bye-laws that prohibit the transfer of clan land without prior approval from the concerned association. Similarly, the Singpho Development Society (SDS) has imposed a blanket ban on land sales to non-Singpho persons across traditional villages in Changlang district, citing threats to cultural survival and historical legacy (Sentinel Digital Desk, 2021).11 These customary norms are not isolated practices but represent a settled legal order among tribal communities, reinforced by clan associations and councils such as the Tai Khamti Singpho Council (TKSC) and such other community based organization actively monitor and invalidate unauthorized land transfers (Tingwa, 2025).12 The legal implications of such displacement extend beyond property rights to encompass the constitutional mandate under the Fifth and Sixth Schedules, the Forest Rights Act, 2006, all of which recognize the primacy of customary law and community consent in tribal land governance. Therefore, any State-led acquisition or relocation must not only provide residential space but also ensure access to cultivable land and livelihood resources sufficient to sustain future generations. .reflecting a collective commitment to preserving territorial integrity and tribal autonomy.
Case Study:
As early as in the 1980s the protests begun against the construction of 11,000 MW hydropower Dam called the Siang Upper Multipurpose Project at Upper Siang district, Arunachal Pradesh. The indigenous Adi people, who inhabit the Siang valley, raise their voices against what they saw as an existential threat. For generations, their villages—such as Komkar, Parong, Riew, Geku, Beging, Gelling, and Tuting—had existed in harmony with the Siang River, which they call “Ane,” or Mother. According, to report over 13 villages would be submerged and another 34 affected if the dam is built.. For the Adi community, the fear went deeper than losing farmland; it was about losing their ancestors’ graves, sacred groves, and the rhythm of their life which revolved around the river, forests, and paddy terraces.
According to them the project progressed without meaningful consultation. The villagers of Parong, led by elders and members of the Siang Indigenous Farmers’ Forum (SIFF), began nightly vigils along the riverbank, performing rituals to protect the Siang and resist intrusive surveys. “We will die before our land is taken,” said Ogak Boko of Komkar village. For the Adi people, land is not an asset—it is identity, culture, and spirit. Their festivals like Aran, Solung, celebrated through communal hunts and offerings to forest spirits, are tied to the very forest. The villagers express their sentiments poignantly: “Once the water covers our homes, our songs and our stories will drown with it.” Their resistance is therefore both political and spiritual—a defense of existence against a project that, to them, represents erasure. Despite state assurances of compensation and resettlement the Adi people remain steadfast, asserting that no compensation can replace the ancestral land that gives them life, identity and subsistence for future generation.
CUSTOMARY MECHANISMS GOVERNING THE ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF LAND
1. Hunting Technique and Territorial Symbolism
Among the indigenous communities of Arunachal Pradesh, hunting and gathering have historically constituted the primary means of subsistence. These practices are not merely economic activities but are deeply embedded in the cultural and territorial identity of the tribes. Since time immemorial, hunting has served both as a survival strategy and as a mechanism for territorial demarcation and ownership.
Hunting among these tribes may be conducted individually or collectively. Over time, the hunting grounds themselves have evolved into symbols of possession and customary entitlement. The tribes employ a variety of traditional techniques, including the use of recurve bows—referred to as Gorung in the Nyishi dialect—for trapping small game such as wild rats, porcupines, squirrels, and birds. Another prevalent method involves a stone trap mechanism, wherein a flat stone is balanced on a twig with bait placed strategically. Upon activation of the trigger, the stone falls, crushing the prey. Fishing in rivers and streams also forms part of the subsistence repertoire, marking the initial engagement with aquatic ecosystems.
Customary Claims and the Role of Oral History
Historically, land, rivers, and mountain corridors used for hunting, fishing, gathering, and cultivation by an individual or family gradually came to be recognized as their customary property. In rural areas, where formal legal documentation is largely absent, land disputes are often complex and contentious. Clans assert territorial claims based on ancestral usage, leading to inter-clan and intra-clan conflicts. In such disputes, oral history assumes evidentiary significance. The narratives of forefathers’ hunting grounds are recounted by both contending parties before the village council, which acts as the customary adjudicatory body. The testimonies of elders often form the basis for determining rightful ownership. Material traces such as the remains of ancient hunting tools, caves once used for expeditions, and paths or tracts cleared by early hunters serve as tangible indicators of ancestral possession. When an individual first enters a virgin forest for hunting or gathering, he clears a distinct path—a tract—that becomes a marker of his presence and claim. Over time, such tracts evolve into symbolic boundaries of ownership, and the rights over these areas are transmitted hereditarily through generations.
The presence of age-old hunting tools, paths, and traps in specific locations serves as customary evidence and determines the legitimacy of territorial claims. The maxim “first in time, first in right” underpins indigenous conceptions of land tenure. The existence of ancestral hunting grounds, enduring oral testimonies, and physical remnants of subsistence practices together constitute the customary evidentiary framework that serve as the foundational basis of customary territorial identity and rights, linking present generations to their ancestral past.
2. Agriculture
The migratory history of the tribes inhabiting present-day Arunachal Pradesh reveals a layered and staggered settlement pattern, with anthropological consensus placing the earliest wave of migration in the central region of the state. Archaeological findings, particularly neolithic tools recovered from various districts, demonstrate cultural affinities with artifacts from Yunnan Province in Southwest China, suggesting a trans-Himalayan movement from the headwaters of the Hwang-Ho and Yangtze rivers.13 These early settlers, classified broadly as Indo-Mongoloid and Paleo-Mongoloid, include tribes such as the Adis, Mishmis, Tagins, Nyishis, and Apatanis, whose oral traditions and material culture trace origins to southern Tibet. Subsequent migratory influxes brought Mahayana Buddhist communities—Monpas, Sherdukpens, Membas, and Khambas into the western and northern frontiers, particularly after the 10th century CE.14 These groups initially occupied highland slopes conducive to cereal cultivation, marking the beginning of sedentary agricultural practices. In the absence of formal legal regimes, land was initially treated as a communal resource. However, the act of cultivation gradually evolved into a customary basis for asserting proprietary rights, with ancestral precedence and uninterrupted possession forming the core of land claims.
Customary land tenure in Arunachal Pradesh is governed by oral jurisprudence, wherein cultivation serves as the primary criterion for ownership. Land rights are determined by genealogical continuity—typically traced through paternal lineage—and validated by the testimony of village elders. In the absence of written documentation, transactions such as gifts, donations, or exchanges are transmitted and adjudicated through communal memory. For instance, in one case (narrated by village elder), land acquired through the exchange of livestock (three pigs and four mithuns) over half a century ago remains under the possession of the recipient’s descendants, with customary law requiring tenfold restitution in the event of reclamation. Shifting cultivation (jhum) further complicates ownership, as land cleared and cultivated for a limited period may be claimed by subsequent cultivators if no objection is raised by the original claimant. Uncultivated land reverts to the lineage of the first cultivator. At present, every tract of land, stream, and forest—symbolically referred to as ‘Moro’—is affiliated with a specific clan, family, or village, governed by unwritten accords respected across tribal boundaries. Breach of these customary understandings often results in inter-clan disputes, underscoring the legal significance of cultivation as a conferral of land rights and the enduring authority of indigenous legal systems in regulating territorial claims.
3. War
War and territoriality have historically constituted essential elements of tribal jurisprudence, shaping customary claims to land and identity. Among tribal societies, territory is not merely a spatial possession but a sacred inheritance tied to ancestry, spirituality, and collective survival. For instance, the Adi tribes of Arunachal Pradesh regarded land as a sacred trust inherited from their forefathers and defended it with customary warfare practices, fortified defenses such as the Bongal Yapgo, and collective inter-clan alliances against external incursions.15 Warfare, therefore, emerged not as a tool of aggression but as a customary method of legitimizing territorial rights and asserting political autonomy. Similar patterns are also visible among Native American tribes, where conflicts like King Philip’s War (1675–1676) arose from attempts to preserve tribal land from colonial expansion, ultimately reinforcing the indigenous doctrine that land rights derive from ancestral occupation and defense.16
In many tribal societies, territorial violence also functioned as a mechanism of regulating inter-tribal boundaries. Inter-tribal conflicts in India, particularly among Tani, Naga, and Khamti communities, were often rooted in disputes over hunting domains, migration routes, and riverine access.17 Oral testimonies record that land inherited through warfare was considered legitimately won land, and its occupation formed the basis of future usufructuary rights by a victorious clan.18 This indigenous law of conquest can be compared to the Western legal doctrine of uti possidetis juris, wherein control over land derives from effective possession. However, unlike modern property law, land in tribal societies is deeply embedded in the moral order; territorial defense was tied to social honour and communal legitimacy. As one Adi elder asserted during field interviews, “Our forefathers shed blood for this land; why should we allow another clan to settle here?”19 Warfare was thus a culturally sanctioned instrument that not only demarcated territorial boundaries but also safeguarded collective dignity and legal sovereignty.
4. Gift and exchange
In many tribal customary systems, the transfer of property by way of gift is a recognized and valid mode of alienation. An adult person of sound mind may, out of free will and without coercion, transfer self-acquired movable or immovable property to any individual, including a married daughter. However, a significant customary restriction exists concerning ancestral or clan land. Such land, being collectively inherited and held under the authority of the lineage or clan, cannot be transferred to a married daughter. This prohibition is deeply rooted in the patriarchal structure of these societies.
The underlying rationale for this restriction lies in the customary principle that upon marriage, a woman becomes affiliated with the clan and lineage of her husband. If a married daughter is gifted immovable property or ancestral land in her natal village, there is a possibility that she and her descendants would continue to reside permanently on that land. Since her children are affiliated to the father’s clan, their permanent settlement in the mother’s village would result in the mixing of clans and could potentially disrupt lineage purity, inheritance patterns, and clan-based territorial jurisdiction. To prevent such socio-cultural dilution, customary law permits the gifting of only movable property—such as ornaments, livestock, and household goods—to married daughters, often as part of traditional practices of dowry or maternal inheritance.
Furthermore, in several tribes, the transfer of land by way of gift to individuals belonging to other clans or outside the community is similarly restricted. This is based on the collective perception that clan and community land represents not only an economic resource but also a symbol of identity, heritage, and territorial sovereignty. Unregulated alienation of land to outsiders is therefore viewed as a threat to clan cohesion, territorial continuity, and demographic stability. Indeed, many traditional villages have gradually transformed into cosmopolitan settlements due to unrestricted transfer of land to members of other clans or communities, leading to concerns over the erosion of customary land tenure systems and indigenous socio-cultural structures. These restrictions reflect the customary legal framework that governs land tenure in tribal society, where land is not treated as an individual commodity but as a collective heritage linking past, present, and future generations.
CLAN AND PRIVATE LAND IN THE STATE
Every Clan possess own territory of land which they claimed to be acquired by their fore-father and pass down them as legacy. Traditionally, land is divided on the basis of clans or title. The collective or common ownership was recognised in the earlier period. However with the passes of time rights over the land can be classified as Clan land rights, community land rights and private land rights.
In anthropological terms, a clan is a named, unilineal descent group—traced through either the male or female line—that links members to a putative common ancestor and functions as a corporate kin unit (Srivastava, 1992, pp. 102–104). Across many Indigenous societies of eastern and central India) clans are typically exogamous (marriage must occur outside the clan), Clans sit between the family/lineage and the wider tribe: they regulate marriage and incest taboos, coordinate life-cycle rites, organize ritual obligations, and provide forums for social control beyond the household (Srivastava, 1992, pp. 102–104; Hoffmann, 1950).
A persistent feature across Arunachal is the coupling of genealogy with territorial precedence. Villages often trace legitimacy to an original founder whose descendants constitute the premier clan segment—frequently retaining hereditary ritual and political offices (e.g., headman/priest).
Clan land denotes the layered bundle of territorial rights vested in the clan as a whole.. At the widest scale, the founding clan holds communal title to the village landscape—forest, rivers, hunting zones, and ritual topography—vis-à-vis outsiders and other clans. Within this communal envelope, sub-clans and lineages exercise more specific control over tracts, streams, fishing stretches, or cemeteries. Finally, families acquire derivative, individualized tenure by clearing, investing labor, and performing legitimating rites, thereby gaining inheritable use-rights that can, within custom, be alienated or transferred (Srivastava, 1992, pp. 103–104; Riddi, 2006, pp. 75–77, 140–143). Among the Tagin, for instance, productive landscapes such as hunting grounds and forests are commonly held at clan or lineage level, while cultivable plots become family property through first clearance and ritual propitiation; enduring disputes reference “first clearance” and clan solidarity to adjudicate boundaries (Riddi, 2006, pp. 75–77). The practical outcome is a nested tenure regime: communal ownership outward, strong family claims inward, all enforced by clan-based institutions (councils, priests, elders) and validated by ritual geography (exclusive burial grounds, sacrificial spaces).
This layered system also structures inheritance, welfare, and sanction. Patrilineal succession predominates in many areas, with sons inheriting lineage property (land, house sites, orchards) and unmarried daughters retaining use-rights in residence; mutual aid within the lineage is obligatory, reflecting the clan’s role as a welfare-bearing property group (Srivastava, 1992, p. 104). In chiefly valleys, councils can impose fines, ritual obligations, or compensatory feasts for transgressions that threaten social or ecological equilibrium—again tying land, law, and cosmology to clan authority (Dutta, 2003, pp. 70–74). the clan is not merely a kin label but the primary juridical and ritual actor through which people articulate belonging to place; and “clan land” is the material expression of that belonging—ancestrally legitimated, ritually marked, politically defended, and flexibly partitioned to households under the guardianship of customary norms (Srivastava, 1992; Danggen, 2014; Riddi, 2006). the transformation of clan or community land into individual or private property in India represents a profound socio-legal shift from traditional collective ownership models to modern statutory property regimes. Historically, tribal communities in India operated under customary land tenure systems where land was held communally by the clan or village, with individuals possessing only usufructuary rights—the right to use and derive benefits from the land without actual ownership. This system ensured subsistence security and social cohesion, as land could not be sold, mortgaged, or permanently alienated outside the community.
LEGAL MECHANISMS GOVERNING THE ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF LAND
The Transfer of Property Act, 1882, forms the foundation of laws dealing with the transfer of immovable property in India and defines the means through which property can be conveyed between living persons—natural or juristic—through sale, mortgage, lease, exchange, or gift. It embodies the general principles governing the transfer of property rights and ensures equitable transactions by specifying who can transfer, what can be transferred, and the conditions under which such transfers take effect (Transfer of Property Act, 1882).20This Act establishes codified rules for ownership exchange and prevents fraudulent or unlawful transfers. However, in the tribal context of Arunachal Pradesh, these general laws coexist with customary practices that govern ownership and transfer exclusively among Scheduled Tribe members, under a system that respects traditional usufruct rights and collective tenure. The Arunachal Pradesh Land Settlement and Records Act, 2000 (as amended in 2018), therefore, functions as the sole legislation overseeing land ownership and transfer in the state, empowering tribals with legal ownership of land through recognized possession certificates and allowing lease arrangements for up to thirty-three years (Arunachal Pradesh Act 11 of 2018, 88–90).21
Public land acquisition in Arunachal Pradesh and across India for infrastructure or developmental purposes is regulated by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act). This law institutionalizes the principle of eminent domain, which authorizes the state to compulsorily acquire private property for public use, provided fair compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement are ensured (Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013.22 The Act redefines the balance between public necessity and private property rights by ensuring acquisition only through participatory, transparent, and consultative procedures while mandating compensation based on the market value of land, accrued interest, and social impact assessment.
Allotment of Government land and purpose
| Sl No. | Purpose | Basic holding | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Residential/Dwelling house | 1000sqm | ||
| 2 | Commercial and business | 500sqm | ||
| 3 | Agriculture/horticulture | Not specified | ||
| 4 | Industrial/factories | Not specified. | ||
Figure1.1: Section 2 (f) of AP land settlement and records Rules 2012
Allotment of Land
According to rule 2 lands means the land over which the government has full right in respect of its disposal and settlement and rule 2 define allottee as the person or persons, a firm or a company, branch or department of central or state government in whose favour the land has been allotted and it includes any person succeeding to the rights of the allottee. Any person who seeks allotment for the residential or commercial purpose under section 12 of Act 2000 has to fulfill the following eligibility criteria as provided under rule 123 of 2012:
1) Any bonafide citizen of India and is an indigenous Arunachal Pradesh Schedule Tribe (APST)
2) Any APST who is above 18 years of age irrespective of gender
3) Domicile of that particular district and capital complex subject to availability of land.
4) Any APSTs EX-service man/handicapped or any other meritorious recognized by the state as land allotment under special quota
Following shall not be eligible for land allotment:
1) Minor who has not attained age of 18 years
2) Not the domicile of the particular district except in capital complex, any APSTs has the rights and the same is not applicable in case of district.
3) Government employee during his/her service is not eligible for allotment of land commercial purpose.
4) Firm or company not authorized or verified or recognized by the government of Arunachal Pradesh.
Rights of Land Owners:
The Arunachal Pradesh Land Settlement and Records Act, 2000 and the Records Rules, 2012 provide the legal basis for the allotment of Government land to indigenous members of the State, irrespective of gender. Under the provisions of Chapter 3 of the Act, land under the control of the Government, or falling within the definition of “Government land,” is eligible for allotment.
And Part XII, Rules 142 to 150 of the Arunachal Pradesh Land Records Rules, 2012, along with Section 88 of the Act, governs provision related to the rights of landowners, as define under Section 2(l) of the Act, whereby the “landowner” in relation to any land is defined as a person who acquires ownership rights through:
1. Inheritance or acquisition in accordance with local custom;
2. Purchase, provided such purchase does not contravene local customs;
3. Gift or donation, received in accordance with local custom; or
4. Acquisition pursuant to the provisions of Section 88 of the Act23.
Table 1.2 Comparative Chart: LPC/LHC and LAC in Arunachal Pradesh
| Sl no. | Basis of comparison | LPC (Land Possession Certificate) / LHC (Land Holding Certificate) | LAC (Land Allotment Certificate) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose | A certificate of ownership cum possession over private/customary land | A certificate of lease allotment of Government land | |
| 1 | Legal Origin | Derived from customary land ownership recognized under Section 88(1A) of A.P. Land Settlement & Records Act, 2000 | Granted under Section 12 of the same Act as allotment of Government land |
| 2 | Applicable Area | Rural/Village areas traditionally; LHC now replaces LPC in Capital Region (from 2023 Standing Order) | Granted under Section 12 of the same Act as allotment of Government land |
| 3 | Status of Land | Issued only for private/community land; not applicable on Government land or Reserved Forest land | Government notified township/urban areas |
| 4 | Nature of Right | Perpetual heritable ownership right | Leasehold right only |
| 5 | Transferability | Freely transferable within tribal/customary norms | Transfer governed by lease conditions |
| 6 | Validity Period | Perpetual (once issued, valid permanently) | 30 years lease, renewable in blocks of 30 years |
| 7 | Fees | One-time issuance fee | Annual land revenue + premium + lease rent |
| 8 | Governing Provision | Derived from Rule 143 of Land Settlement & Records Rules, 2012 (certificate format), though procedure not prescribed in detail | Detailed procedure under A.P. Land Settlement and Records Rules, 2012 (application, demarcation, revenue, lease deed, renewal, cancellation etc.) |
| 9 | Competent Authority | Deputy Commissioner / DLRSO | Deputy Commissioner through Land Advisory Committee |
| 10 | Application Mode | Now available online through LISA Portal (for LHC) | Offline/Online via District Land Management authority |
| 11 | Revenue | No annual revenue payable | Annual land revenue + lease rent |
| 12 | Transfer Rights | Sale/gift/mortgage/inheritance allowed under Section 89 | Transfer restricted, requires govt. approval |
| 13 | Mutation | Recorded under Section 44 mutation law | |
| 14 | Procedural | Act 2000, and Rule 2012 is silent | Detailed procedure given in Rules 123–141 |
CONCLUSION
Arunachal Pradesh stands at a critical juncture where legal codification must continue to evolve in harmony with tribal customs. Strengthening land records, enhancing participatory governance, and safeguarding indigenous rights will be essential to ensuring that land remains not just a resource, but a cornerstone of identity, heritage, and self-determination. The land rights regime in Arunachal Pradesh reflects a complex interplay between statutory laws and deeply rooted customary practices. The enactment of the Arunachal Pradesh (Land Settlement and Records) Act, 2000, along with its subsequent amendments, marks a significant step toward formalizing land revenue administration while respecting indigenous norms. This legislation acknowledges have its own limitation such as non-recognising the community ownership, clan-based tenure systems, and their land records. Issues such as lack of formal documentation, overlapping claims, and resistance to external land acquisition underscore the need for sensitive and inclusive policy-making. The state’s unique socio-cultural fabric demands that land reforms be guided not merely by administrative efficiency but by principles of justice, autonomy, and cultural preservation.
*****
Footnotes
1. Jeanette Armstrong, Land and Rights retrieved from https://ccgs.ok.ubc.ca/about/contact/jeannette-armstrong/
2. Chatterjee, S.K, The Place of Assam in the History and Civilization of India, Guahati, 1955, P.110
3. Tada, Tage, Tripathi, B, Archaeological remains of Arunachal Pradesh up to 16th century, 2011, strived from http://hdl.handle.net/10603/288770, 16.09.2024 , 20;06
4. Sharma, T.C the Neolithic Pattern of North East Indi, in Nagaraju Rao. M.S (ed) Madhu: Recent Researchers in Indian Archaeology and Art History, Delhi, 1981, Pp 41-52
5. Tada, Tage, Tripathi, B, Archaeological remains of Arunachal Pradesh up to 16th century, 2011, strived from http://hdl.handle.net/10603/288770, 16.09.2024 , 20;06
6. Charton Franck, Arunachal Festival, Arunachal Pradesh Festivals : Losar – Myoko – Ziro | Culture and Traditions, 18.08.2025
7. United Nations Human Rights Commission, Indigeneous and tribal people conventions ( No. 169 of 1989) retrieved from Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) | OHCHR,18.08.2025, 18:50
8. Springate-Baginski, O., Sarin, M., Ghosh, S., Dasgupta, P., Bose, I., Banerjee, A., Sarap, K., Misra, P., Behera, S., Reddy, M. G., & Rao, P. T. (2019). Redressing ‘historical injustice’ through the Indian Forest Rights Act 2006. Socio-Legal Information Centre. https://www.slic.org.in/publication/redressing-historical-injustice-through-the-indian-forest-rights-act-2006-5ec7c642c7157
9. Section 3 of THE SCHEDULED TRIBES AND OTHER TRADITIONAL FOREST DWELLERS (RECOGNITION OF FOREST RIGHTS) ACT, 2006
10. Ibid Section 4 sub-clause (4)
11. Sentinel Digital Desk. (2021, August 23). SDS bans the selling of land in Singpho traditional villages to non-Singpho people. The Sentinel. https://www.sentinelassam.com/north-east-india-news/arunachal-news/sds-bans-the-selling-of-land-in-singpho-traditional-villages-to-non-singpho-people-552982
12. Tingwa, I. (2025, September 3). TKSC asks landowners to cancel illegal land sales. The Arunachal Times.
13. Tade Tage, Tripathi, B, 2011
14. Das Gupta, K K, 1984, History and Archaeology of Arunachal Pradesh
15. R. Tani, Resistance Movements in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh (2019) 23.
16. Jill Lepore, The Name of War: King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity (Knopf 1998).
17. tribal territorial disputes documented in D. Esse, Assam-Arunachal Border Narratives (Tezpur University, 2017) 73
18. H.K. Barpujari, Assam in the Days of the Company 1826–1858 (Lawyer’s Book Stall 1963) 76
19. Oral testimony by T.Tasso from fieldwork, Itanagar, 2025
20. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2338/1/A1882-04.pdf
21. The Arunachal Pradesh (Land Settlement and Records) (Amendment) Act, 2018, Act No. 11 of 2018 (India).
22. Section 26-31 The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, No. 30, Acts of Parliament, 2013 (India).
23. Section 2 (I) The Arunachal Pradesh Land Settlement and Records Ac 10 of 2000