Chhaya Bhardwaj1Saksham Misra2
India’s Renewable Success
Can a transition to clean energy, meant to mitigate the adverse implications of climate change, justify dispossessing Tribal and Local Communities (TLCs) from their native land? This post examines the adverse implications of India’s renewable energy transition for the TLCs of India’s Thar Desert, whose sacred groves (Orans), grazing commons (Gauchars), and water sources are being allocated for solar and wind projects. Using a human-rights-based approach, it explains how communities are turning to litigation to contest these allotments, identifies gaps in land allocation and environmental assessment, and maps the human rights at stake. Through this post, we argue that a transition that bypasses the people risks losing its legitimacy.
India is making remarkable progress in installing renewable energy. As of 30th September 2026, India’s installed renewable energy capacity stood at 299 Giga Watts (GW), with solar contributing 171.05 GW and wind 59.20 GW, together accounting for over 93% of renewable capacity excluding large hydro. But there is a cost that is intrinsically attached to India’s renewable success story: aggressive, arbitrary land grabbing for solar and wind expansions. The Tribal and Local Communities (TLCs) are facing human rights abuses arising from arbitrary land procurements for renewable projects, including the destruction of desert ecology, loss of livelihood, and customary land rights. These impacts have triggered community contestation, including strategic litigation against the Renewable Energy Corporations (RECs).
Rise in Legal Contestation against Renewable Projects
The State of Rajasthan (India) is among the leading contributors to electricity generation from wind and solar energy, accounting for 20% of India’s total estimated renewable power potential as of 31 March 2024. Tribal and Local Communities (TLCs) in the Thar desert districts of Rajasthan are protesting against the installation of solar projects in their backyards, alleging destruction of desert ecology due to rampant cutting of Orans (Sacred groves), death of critically endangered birds such as Great Indian Bustards, loss of common grazing lands called Gauchars, and acquisitions of ponds, catchment areas which are essential sources of water in Thar Desert districts. Communities are now actively using litigation as a strategic tool to contest land allotments for renewable projects that overlook existing land use, ecology, and community interests.
One of the recent cases before the High Court of Rajasthan, i.e., Shri Jambeshwar Paryavaran and Jeev Raksha Sanstha v. State of Rajasthan & Others 2025, was filed as a public interest litigation to protect desert ecology by seeking a ban on the cutting of Khejri (Prosopis Cineraria) trees for a solar energy project in the desert districts of Bikaner, Jodhpur, Barmer, and Phalodi. Recognizing the Khejri’s ecological and cultural significance, particularly to the Bishnoi community, the Court directed that no Khejri trees be cut without the required approvals.
Similarly, for solar and wind energy projects in Rajasthan, the government is on a spree to acquire the Orans (sacred groves) in western Rajasthan. Orans are community-protected forests and biodiversity hotspots in the middle of deserts; they host diverse flora and fauna. Most Orans are named after local saints and deities, such as the famous ‘Pabuji ka Oran’ and ‘Karni Mata ka Oran’. Orans are examples of community-conserved biospheres that have ecological, religious, and cultural significances for the TLCs. Many of the Orans are recorded as ‘waste land’ in the land records; hence, they are allotted to other lands for renewable development. In Chanesar Khan v. State of Rajasthan, the land allotment made in favor of REC was challenged on the ground that it allegedly involved the acquisition of land with Orchards, pastoral land, places of public worship, and catchment areas. After the Supreme Court’s verdict in T.N. Godavarman v. Union of India, 2024, Orans have been declared a community reserve under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (para 55).
Another issue related to the land is the allotment of community grazing lands, called Gauchar or Charagha, for renewable projects. The local pastoral communities, such as the Raika, who are camel breeders, are disproportionately affected by the acquisition and allocation of land for solar energy. Due to the current use of land previously used by Raika, they are now struggling to manage fodder and pursue their pastoral lifestyle, as the common grazing area has been enclosed by RECs. The international standards governing indigenous and tribal peoples’ human rights prescribe a duty on governments to ensure that tribal peoples are consulted and protected when government decisions affect their traditional lands. In India, a law that facilitates consultations and, consequently, protection for such tribes does not currently exist.
Which Human Rights are affected?
With the above-mentioned discussion, the overlaps between renewable energy projects and human rights can be examined by listing the human rights affected. At the heart of the discussion lie two human rights of Indian citizens: the right to a healthy environment and the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change. The adverse effects of renewable energy projects on the desert ecology and Orans are detrimental to the right to a healthy environment. Similarly, in M K Ranjith Singh v. Union of India, the Supreme Court confirmed that people have a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change and a right not to be displaced. Read together, these principles arguably require that the energy transition itself not displace the communities it is meant to protect.
Additionally, the right to cultural, spiritual, and traditional practices of TLCs is also affected. Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of conscience and religion, which applies to all citizens of India and allows them to practice their spiritual and religious beliefs. The reasonable restrictions on the practice of these rights are grounded in public order, morality, and health. The practices of TLCs are being unreasonably impaired by the establishment of renewable energy projects. This right of TLCs is also supported by the Constitutionally guaranteed right of minorities under Article 29(1), under which citizens with distinct cultural and traditional practices have a human right to conserve them. If the TLCs have distinct traditional practices and folklore, then that should also be protected under these Constitutional guarantees.
It is evident from the discussion in the previous sections that the TLCs are not adequately included in the decision-making process related to their lands. Their full and effective participation in deciding whether the solar energy projects should be installed on their traditional lands is not guaranteed. This impairs Article 19(1)(a) – guarantees of speech and expression of people, and Article 19(1)(b) – guarantees of assembly and association. The collective impact of these rights is to guarantee TLCs the right to hold opinions, engage in public debate, access information about projects, form advocacy groups, and collectively influence decision-making. The fact that the voices of the TLCs are not even considered is an impairment of the guarantees under Article 19 of the Constitution.
Finally, there are violations of Article 14 – right to equality and Article 21 – right to life guarantees under the Indian Constitution. The discussion that confirms that TLC’s voices are not given equal consideration in the decision-making of the solar-energy projects is, in fact, discriminatory and furthers arbitrary decision-making. Finally, the guarantees of a healthy environment, the right to be free from adverse effects of climate change, and culture are all guarantees of the right to life – Article 21. Collectively, installations of renewable energy projects in the Thar Desert overlap with several constitutionally guaranteed human rights in India. Their protection can be furthered with effective mechanisms in place or through climate litigation.
Arbitrariness in Solar Energy Projects and Their Legitimacy
The litigation and overlapping human rights issues discussed above can be traced to a single government act: the land allotment procedures for renewable projects in Rajasthan. Any development project, including a utility-scale renewable energy project, is a land-intensive process that requires procedural safeguards to mitigate risks to communities that lose land used for their subsistence. Currently, desert land is a multipurpose resource in India rather than merely a commodity; siting decisions for renewable projects need to be more inclusive and to involve ex-ante assessments.
These land allocations are made solely to electrify India. In M K Ranjith Singh v. Union of India, the Court reiterated that many citizens of India lack access to a reliable electricity supply, hindering their economic growth and further increasing inequalities (para 35). The solar energy projects offer several social and economic benefits, including energy access for millions of Indians (para 37), and the desert lands are ideal for these projects (para 43). Given the benefits of solar energy projects for millions of people, their installation is reasonable and justified (pages 15-16). This, however, remains a position that justifies the benefits of the majority, at the cost of human rights violations of the minorities. The minorities in this case are TLCs, and the majority are the millions of Indians who receive electricity and other utility benefits from the solar energy project’s installation.
In the case of solar energy projects in India, the idea of benefiting the majority is currently being used to justify the arbitrariness and illegitimacy of land allocations for these projects. According to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, existing laws governing Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 2006 do not apply to solar photovoltaic power projects, solar thermal power plants, and developments of solar parks. The exemption from EIA bypasses the solar project land allotment from the rigors of community involvement and environmental precautionary measures. This exemption also allows the state to install such large-scale projects without effective consultation with the affected communities and, consequently, their protection. Additionally, it has been reported that land procurements for the projects are facilitated by state governments through fast-track land acquisition policies and land lease agreements with communities. The lease model for acquisition allows developers to bypass the rigors of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) and EIAs, which are required under the Land Acquisition Act of 2013.
The arbitrariness that facilitates the fast-track development of solar energy projects in India not only violates the human rights of TLCs but also undermines the legitimacy of these projects. The overriding of existing legal frameworks and mechanisms for land allocation and human rights protections, and the creation of frameworks that enable this override, raise concerns about the legitimacy of such projects. As a recommendation, the government can strengthen existing legitimate frameworks to ensure that arbitrariness and concerns over legitimacy do not penetrate the development of renewable energy capacity in India.
- Chhaya Bhardwaj is a PhD Scholar at Dublin City University ↩︎
- Saksham Misra is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Petroleum and Energy Studies (UPES), Dehradun, India, and a PhD Scholar at Gujarat National Law University ↩︎
Leave a Reply