Abstract

Development-induced displacement (DID) involves the forcible relocation of populations due to extensive mining, industrial, and infrastructure projects aimed at advancing economic development. It has surfaced as a grave challenge in India, inordinately affecting the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs), whose sense of self and well-being are inextricably linked to their ancestral lands and the vibrant tapestry of their culture. Both historical and contemporary ramifications of development policies have often marginalized PVTGs, underscoring the human cost of systemic failures. The consequences of displacement—economic impoverishment, community disintegration, and loss of cultural identity—are examined through specific case studies, such as that of the Narmada Dam Project and Vedanta mining in Niyamgiri Hills. The paper evaluates the legal frameworks governing displacement, particularly the Land Acquisition Act of 1894, the Forest Rights Act of 2006, and the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013, identifying issues such as inadequate compensation, ineffective rehabilitation measures, and the absence of culturally sensitive measures. Judicial rulings such as the Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India and N.D. Jayal v. Union of India reveals recurring failures in addressing displacement and ensuring justice for vulnerable groups. The research uses a qualitative methodology to synthesize insights from secondary sources like government bodies, non-governmental organizations reports, and institutions like the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). It highlights the lack of comprehensive data on PVTGs and the inefficiency in institutional mechanisms, uncovering systematic flaws in policy frameworks. In furtherance, recommendations on adopting sustainable practices, strengthening legal safeguards to protect the PVTGs, including PVTGs in policy formulation, and decision-making processes to safeguard their rights and expressions are made. The findings emphasize the necessity of a development paradigm that balances economic progress with cultural preservation and social equity. It calls for a more inclusive approach that prioritizes the dignity, cultural autonomy, and well-being of PVTGs while fostering sustainable and equitable growth.

Keywords