Niyamgiri: Tribals' rights vs mining rights

On 26 October, hundreds of villagers, including many Adivasi women, marched through Muniguda at the foothills of Odisha’s Niyamgiri demanding the release of Lada Sikaka and Dr Randall Sequeira. Sikaka, president of the Niyamgiri Surakhya Samiti (NSS) and Sequeira, member of the Medico Friends Circle, had been arrested 10 days earlier.

Their crime? Participating in protests against bauxite mining by Vedanta and the Adani group. Dr Sequeira is a familiar face among the rural Adivasi and Dalit communities in Odisha and Jharkhand, working for the last seven years as part of a network of doctors who practise in remote areas across the country.

In September, Anil Agarwal, the corporate head of Vedanta met Odisha chief minister Mohan Charan Majhi to renew his demand to start bauxite mining in Niyamgiri. Calling a presser from the CM’s official residence, Agarwal said they had discussed reopening Niyamgiri “immediately”. This, he said, would “provide the tribal population with employment opportunities and help bring them into the development process.”

Agarwal went on to announce a planned Rs 1 lakh crore investment in the state across the mining, refining and downstream manufacturing sectors. Claiming support from the local Adivasi population, he said that gram sabha meetings had been conducted across Niyamgiri and resulted in unanimous approval.

As the protests reveal, and as Sikaka told this reporter (prior to his arrest), this was “a blatant lie”. What the villagers are unanimous about is their opposition to mining in this region.

“Niyamgiri comprises a small area of just around 660 hectares. We are the Niyam Kondh, meaning protector of streams. We have been entrusted with the care of our forests, mountains and streams. Niyamgiri literally means ‘mountain of law’. It is the abode of Niyam raja, our supreme law-giver. Every year, we go to the Niyamgiri hills to pray and offer thanks. Why would we give our god up for bauxite mining?” asked Sikaka.

Aflatoon heads the Samajwadi Jan Parishad (SJP) which also took part in the 26 October demonstration under the banner of the NSS. He says, “The matter of fake gram sabha meets where signatures had allegedly been forged went up to the Cuttack High Court. But the district magistrate of Rayagada informed the court that he had been present during these meetings and vouched for their veracity.”

Vedanta’s Niyamgiri project has been in limbo since 2013 after a dozen gram sabhas rejected the proposal to divert forestland for bauxite mining. The landmark Supreme Court judgement in April 2013 called for a referendum, empowering local communities to have a final say on whether their forestland should be cleared or not. Those gram sabhas were held under the direct supervision of Cuttack High Court, which had ordered judicial officers to supervise them. Unfortunately, the present gram sabhas are organised under the executive which is known to follow the orders of its political masters.

Binati Kadraka lives in the village Damon Ponga and is a member of the NSS. She is outspoken in her critique of the government’s tactics to subdue them. “The forcible takeover of our traditional land concerns our livelihood, our culture and our faith. Everything we stand for is at stake. We are fighting to save our civilisation.”

Instead of protecting its tribal people, the state government — led by a tribal chief minister — is working in the opposite direction. Krushna Sikaka, SJP district secretary, asks why activists are being arrested without their names even being listed in the FIR. “Ever since the anti-mining resistance began in 2023, over a hundred Dalit and Adivasis have been arrested by the police.”

Lingaraj Azad, SJP president and advisor with the NSS, is one of them. “On 25 March,” Krushna said, “Azad was arrested and eight charges were levied against him. When he got bail on all charges, the police levied yet another charge. He is still in jail.”

As is Hiramal Naik, a member of the Maa Mati Mali Suraksha Mancha, another grassroots organisation opposed to Vedanta’s Sijimali bauxite mining project. “Naik has been in jail since his arrest on 28 August,” said Krushna.

When Akhilesh Singh, DIG (south Odisha), was asked by local journalists why the jail terms of activists were being extended indefinitely, he replied that he would not allow the likes of Azad to be released.

There’s another reason for Agarwal’s hurry to push through the mining project. On 1 October, the Cuttack High Court dismissed a petition filed by Vedanta against Odisha Mining Corporation (OMC).

Vedanta had sought the supply of 150 million tonnes of bauxite at older, cost-linked rates under a 2004 agreement for its aluminium refinery in Lanjigarh, Kalahandi district. However, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman ruled that the company could neither revive nor enforce agreements terminated in September 2015, after amendments to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act. The court held that Vedanta had failed to challenge the terminations in time, thereby rendering them final.

This has forced Vedanta to purchase market-rate bauxite, costing Vedanta Aluminium an additional Rs 5,600 crore.

Activists believe that the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act 2026 was rushed through in Parliament to benefit corporates like Vedanta, who could now write off lakhs of crores of rupees owed to mineral-rich states. (States have been allocating revenues generated from mining for public welfare programmes like healthcare, education, social security, agriculture, sanitation and drinking water.)

Opposing such write-offs, the Federation of Indian Mining Industries had argued that the mining industry stood to lose Rs 1.5-2 lakh crore due to tax arrears. Vedanta alone is liable to pay royalties worth Rs 6,249 crore for 2023-24.

Activists like Aflatoon are asking whether the dilution of the state’s role in granting mining leases and collecting revenue could save Vedanta from coughing up what they owe.

While mining corporates rejoice in the law easing the acquisition of auctioned mining blocks by speeding up environmental, forest and wildlife clearances, critics note that the acceleration comes at a terrible cost.

Legal experts maintain that any attempt to reopen the Niyamgiri hills to mining would violate the fundamental rights of tribal communities. The Supreme Court’s 2013 endorsement of the gram sabhas’ decision against mining established a binding precedent that cannot easily be overturned. Doing so would violate a community’s religious beliefs which goes against our Constitution and therefore amounts to a constitutional challenge.

Meanwhile, the protests for the release of arrested activists continue. As Dr Sequeira’s mother Nancy wrote in her letter to the powers that be: ‘Randall has stood beside the Adivasi people because he is deeply concerned about their lives, their health, their ancestral lands and their future. He fears that mining activities could expose these vulnerable communities to serious health problems and deprive them of the environment and livelihoods on which they depend. The poor and oppressed need Randall. They need their doctor, their compassionate healer, someone who cares about their suffering.’