Author: Avni Tripathi, Student of National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam
ABSTRACT
Environmental displacement in India is a pressing issue that often doesn’t get the attention it deserves, especially when it comes to marginalized groups like the Adivasis, Dalits, and rural communities. With climate change, natural disasters, and environmental damage forcing people to move, the problem is only growing. Unfortunately, Indian laws don’t clearly recognize or protect those displaced by environmental factors. Laws like the Disaster Management Act and the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act are either too limited in scope or not enforced effectively. Court rulings have not yet recognized displacement as a fundamental rights issue under Article 21 of the Constitution. This emphasizes a serious legal gap, which adds to the socio-economic hardships faced by vulnerable populations, and shows our failure to meet both constitutional protections and international human rights standards. What’s needed now is a rights-based legal framework that explicitly acknowledges environmentally displaced persons and ensures they receive dignified, participatory, and fair rehabilitation support.
Environmental displacement in India, whether caused by natural disasters, climate change, or large-scale development projects, poses some of the biggest humanitarian and legal challenges of our time. Despite how often and widespread these displacements are, Indian law noticeably doesn’t address the rights or rehabilitation needs of those displaced due to environmental reasons. This legal gap leaves the most vulnerable groups like Dalits, Adivasis, women, and the economically disadvantaged, without protection, exposing them to ongoing social, economic, and political exclusion. The absence of a solid legal framework to deal with this pressing issue reflects a concerning lack of policy action, even as climate-driven displacement continues to grow rapidly.
Environmental displacement in India occurs mainly in two ways: sudden events like cyclones, floods, and landslides, and slow-moving processes such as droughts, desertification, and rising sea levels. As climate change and unsustainable development practices intensify over time, these issues are becoming increasingly frequent. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC), India saw over 5.4 million in 2024, primarily driven by extreme weather events like floods, storms and other disasters, including environmental crises, the highest figure in 12 years. These figures, however, do not account for those who are displaced by human-made interventions such as mining, dams, and deforestation, which also have profound environmental consequences.
Despite the important challenges faced, Indian law has yet to recognise ‘environmentally displaced persons’ as a clearly defined legal category. Unlike refugees under international frameworks or internally displaced persons (IDPs) caused by conflict or development projects, there is no specific statutory recognition for these individuals. The Disaster Management Act, 2005, was enacted in response to increasing disaster risks, and its primary focus is on providing relief and immediate response efforts. However, it falls short when it comes to guaranteeing long-term solutions such as rehabilitation, resettlement, or enforceable rights for those who are permanently displaced by environmental events. Also, the Act does not establish any formal grievance redressal mechanisms or define rights for displaced persons. While it does create a National Disaster Response Fund, this fund is mainly dedicated to emergency response and reconstruction, rather than ensuring access to housing, livelihoods, or restitution for affected communities.
When displacement results from government-led infrastructure or industrial projects, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act), provides some legal safeguards. It requires that those whose land is acquired for public use receive compensation and resettlement benefits. However, this law only covers cases where the government directly acquires land, so it does not apply to displacements caused by environmental factors like floods or droughts, even if such events are worsened by government policies or lack of climate action. Also, the law has faced criticism for poor implementation, with reports pointing to delays, inadequate compensation, and ineffective rehabilitation efforts. Importantly, it does not fully address the specific issues of environmental displacement, such as the gradual loss of habitability or the informal settlements that often lack formal recognition.
Another important law to consider is the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA), this legislation formally acknowledges the rights of Adivasi and forest-dependent communities over their ancestral lands and forest resources. However, in practice, these rights often go unrecognised or are disregarded, especially when these lands are targeted for activities like mining, dam construction, or conservation projects. Procedural safeguards such as community consent and recognition of individual forest rights are frequently ignored or bypassed. When environmental degradation or deforestation forces displacement, these communities often find themselves invisible in the eyes of the law, and they typically do not receive adequate compensation or rehabilitation.
The Indian judiciary has shown initiative in the area of environmental law, yet it has struggled to develop clear and binding standards concerning the rights of those who are displaced. In the case of Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, the Supreme Court approved the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam, emphasising that development remains a key goal for the state. The Court also viewed rehabilitation as a policy issue rather than something that could be enforced as a fundamental right. While it recognised the importance of fair rehabilitation, it stopped short of incorporating it into the protections offered under Article 21. This conservative approach is further reflected in the Court’s reluctance to interpret the right to life as including protections against displacement without proper procedural safeguards and guarantees.
This contrasts with earlier rulings like Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, where the Supreme Court recognized that the right to livelihood is an essential aspect of the right to life guaranteed by Article 21. The Court held that forcibly evicting pavement dwellers without providing proper rehabilitation violated constitutional rights. However, this perspective has not been extended to situations involving communities displaced by environmental changes, who are often removed from lands they have traditionally inhabited without any legal recognition of their tenure.
The lack of a strong legal framework and binding legal precedents has greatly increased the socio-economic vulnerabilities faced by marginalized communities affected by environmental displacement. One of the most pressing issues is the insecurity of their livelihoods. Communities forced to relocate, especially those relying on agriculture, forests, and coastal ecosystems, often find themselves without any sustainable alternatives to support themselves. In tribal regions across Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha, the growth of coal mining and deforestation has not only displaced Adivasi populations but also devastated the forest-based economies they depended on. When compensation is provided, it’s frequently inadequate, delayed, or given in cash instead of land or job opportunities, which further undermines their long-term stability.
Displacement causes important cultural and psychological hardships, especially for Adivasi communities. Moving away from their lands doesn’t just mean economic setbacks; it threatens their very identity and social fabric. Their spiritual practices, languages, and customs are rooted in the land and forests they have depended on for generations. When these natural habitats are destroyed, it results in a loss of community history, language, and traditions. Women are hit the hardest in these situations as they often carry the responsibility of keeping households running amid increasing uncertainty. Also, they face higher risks of violence, reduced autonomy, and being marginalized in decisions related to relief and rehabilitation efforts.
The National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy of 2007 aims to provide a framework for assisting those displaced due to development projects. However, the policy itself lacks legal enforceability, as it is non-binding and does not hold statutory power. Besides, it excludes displacement resulting from natural disasters or environmental changes. Besides, the implementation of this policy has been inconsistent and largely ineffective; a 2011 report by the Planning Commission revealed that fewer than 30% of displaced individuals received the full benefits of rehabilitation under the existing policies.
The combined impact of legal invisibility, institutional indifference, and social marginalization creates a persistent pattern of widespread injustice. Environmental displacement in India does not happen in a legal vacuum; rather, it’s actively assisted by gaps, silences, and exclusions within the law itself. India’s legal framework often fails to acknowledge the rights of those displaced by environmental factors, violating constitutional principles of equality and dignity outlined in Articles 14 and 21. Moreover, this failure undermines the Directive Principles of State Policy, particularly Articles 38 and 39, which emphasize reducing income and opportunity disparities and ensuring access to adequate livelihoods.
International law provides important normative guidance, even if it isn’t legally binding. The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement from 1998 emphasize the rights of internally displaced persons (IDPs) to protection against arbitrary displacement, participation in decision-making processes, and access to basic living standards such as housing, education, and healthcare. While India is not legally obligated to follow these principles, they are a strong benchmark for reforming domestic laws. Notably, Principle 21 upholds the right of displaced individuals to seek restitution or compensation for property lost during displacement. Besides, agreements like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction urge countries to develop national policies aimed at managing climate-related migration and displacement.
Despite commitments made on the international stage, India’s domestic climate change policies, as outlined in the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC), unfortunately do not address issues related to human mobility, migration, or displacement. This gap is especially concerning given the IPCC’s forecasts that climate change will lead to more frequent and severe weather events in South Asia, making many areas uninhabitable. Without proactive planning and legal frameworks in place, the primary burden of climate-induced displacement will unjustly impact the most vulnerable populations.
There is an urgent need for comprehensive national legislation that treats environmental displacement as a matter of rights rather than charity. Such legislation should clearly define what environmental displacement entails, and explicitly recognize the rights to protection, rehabilitation, and active participation. It must establish legally enforceable entitlements and be rooted in constitutional guarantees of dignity and equality, while also aligning with India’s international obligations. Besides, the law should set up institutional mechanisms to ensure effective grievance redressal, promote community involvement, and hold authorities accountable during implementation. It is equally important that the legislation acknowledges the particular needs of women, children, indigenous groups, and persons with disabilities, offering culturally sensitive and appropriate rehabilitation support.
Judicial intervention can be important during this period. The Supreme Court needs to acknowledge that forcing people to move without proper rehabilitation breaches their fundamental right to life under Article 21. Just as the Court has previously broadened the scope of “life” to include essentials like livelihood, housing, and health, it should now also affirm that the right not to be displaced arbitrarily is a basic human right. Similarly, High Courts must also take an active role in safeguarding the rights of displaced individuals, ensuring they have access to welfare services, proper identification documents, and opportunities for political participation.
Conclusion
the situation of environmental displacement in India exposes a striking contradiction: the communities most at risk are those who have done the least to contribute to environmental issues and are the ones bearing the brunt of their impacts and lack adequate legal protections. The current absence of a clear legal framework keeps cycles of poverty, marginalization, and injustice alive. As India struggles with the dual challenges of development and climate change, it is essential to rethink and strengthen its legal and institutional systems to prioritize the rights of displaced populations. A fair and democratic society cannot ignore those it has marginalized or rendered invisible. Recognition, restitution, and rehabilitation should not be optional; they are fundamental constitutional obligations that must be upheld.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs)
What is environmental displacement?
It refers to the forced migration of people due to natural disasters, climate change, or environmental degradation caused by human activity (e.g., mining, deforestation, rising sea levels).
Is there any law in India that protects environmentally displaced persons (EDPs)?
No. Indian law does not specifically recognize or protect EDPs. Existing laws like the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and LARR Act, 2013 are limited in scope and do not cover displacement caused by environmental factors.
Who are the most affected by environmental displacement in India?
Adivasis, Dalits, and landless rural populations are most affected. They often lack land titles, legal protection, and access to state welfare after displacement.
What are the constitutional rights relevant to EDPs?
Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) can be interpreted to offer protection, but courts have not consistently applied them in environmental displacement cases.
What does international law say about this issue?
The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998) recommend protection and rehabilitation for displaced persons. India is not legally bound but can adopt these as standards.
What is the solution?
India needs a national law that defines EDPs, ensures their rights to compensation and rehabilitation, and aligns with constitutional and human rights obligations.
References
1 India Records Millions of Displacements Due to Disasters in 2024, Highest in 12 Years, The Hindu (Oct. 17, 2024), https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-reco rds-millions-of-displacements-due-to-disasters-in-2 024-highest-in-12-years-report/article69571202.ece
2 Disaster Management Act, No. 53, India Code (2005).
Rehabilitation and 3 The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Resettlement Act, No. 30 of 2013, INDIA CODE (2013).
4 Kanchi Kohli & Manju Menon, Narratives of Natural Resource Corruption and Environmental Regulatory Reforms in India, 56 Econ. & Pol. Wkly., Review of Environment & Development Issue 52 (Dec. 25, 2021).
5 The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, No. 2 of 2007, INDIA CODE (2007).
6 Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, (2000) 10 SCC 664.
7 Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corp., (1985) 3 SCC 545.
8 Fernandes, W. (2001). Development induced displacement and sustainable development. Social Change,
pp.87-103. 31(1-2),
doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/004908570103100208.
9 Nat’l Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy, 2007 (India).
10 Planning Commission of India, Report on Displaced Individuals and Rehabilitation Policies (2011).
11 U.N. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2 (Feb. 11, 1998).
12 U.N. Framework Convention On Climate Change, Decisions on Human Mobility (2015-2021).
13 National Action Plan on Climate Change, Government of India (June 30, 2008).
