Abstract
The Hasdeo Arand dispute in Chhattisgarh poses a contradiction in India’s development trajectory in Adivasi regions. The resource-rich Adivasi areas are treated as sites of growth, whereas their original inhabitants bear its ecological and cultural costs. In this article, Hasdeo is treated not as a conflict over coal mining or environmental loss, but as an ongoing conflict of developmental imperatives versus constitutional justice. This article argues that development-induced displacement disrupts livelihoods, cultural landscapes, social structure, community institutions and collective capacity, which cannot be solely addressed through economic compensation and rehabilitation. Together, these dimensions raise questions about Gram Sabha participation and constitutional safeguards in Scheduled Areas. The article advocates for a development paradigm that would recognize and ensure democratic participation and distributive justice as well as the rights of Adivasis. The case of Hasdeo demonstrates that development without meaningful consent risks reproducing the very marginalization that constitutional safeguards seek to prevent.