Saranda

From Indpaedia
Revision as of 16:10, 25 November 2025 by Jyoti Sharma (Jyoti) (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Hindi English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish

Contents

Saranda, 1908

This article has been extracted from

THE IMPERIAL GAZETTEER OF INDIA , 1908.

OXFORD, AT THE CLARENDON PRESS.


Note: National, provincial and district boundaries have changed considerably since 1908. Typically, old states, ‘divisions’ and districts have been broken into smaller units, and many tahsils upgraded to districts. Some units have since been renamed. Therefore, this article is being posted mainly for its historical value.


Hill range in the extreme south-west corner of Singh- bhum District, Bengal, lying between 22 i' and 22 28' N. and 85 o' and 85 26' E., bordering on the Gangpur State. It consists of a mass of mountains, rising to the height of 3,500 feet. The population inhabiting this region is scattered over a few poor hamlets nestling in deep valleys, and belongs for the most part to the Ho and other aboriginal tribes.

21st century

Saranda game reserve> sanctuary

The issues in 2025

Oct 18, 2025: The Times of India

New Delhi : After agreeing to declare 310 sqkm of pristine Sal tree forest in Saranda game reserve as a sanctuary and risking contempt proceedings, Jharkhand govt told Supreme Court it was ready to notify 250 sqkm and sought exemption of 60 sqkm on the grounds that they were inhabited by a huge tribal population.


Appearing for the state, senior advocate Kapil Sibal presented Google Maps to demonstrate that 250 sqkm were substantially free of habitation and placed before a bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran a draft notification for the area. SC has already exempted the mines operated by Steel Authority of India within the limits of Saranda forest.


Senior advocate Gaurav Sharma, appearing for tribals, said declaring the entire 310 sqkm as a sanctuary would severely impact the livelihood of the approximately 91,000-strong tribal population, which resided in 99 villages within the proposed sanctuary limits. He said the forest rights of the tribal people should be settled prior to declaring the forest as a sanctuary. 
Both the bench and amicus curiae K Parameswaran said that a sanctuary was different from a national park, where no habitation is allowed. In a sanctuary, forest dwellers’ rights remain protected, the amicus said.


Parameswaran accused Jharkhand govt of attempting to shield mining activities by seeking exemption of 60 sqkm. Sibal protested and said there was no mining activity in thatarea. 
The bench said exempting 60 sqkm from the proposed sanctuary would disturb the contiguity of forest. However, it agreed to consider the entire issue, including rights of forest dwellers, on Oct 27. It also asked state govt to give details of mining activities in the 60 sqkm area.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox
Translate