A large proportion of these communities were originally shifting cultivators (and many continue to be so), but the postcolonial Indian state continued the British policy of viewing such cultivation as a threat and attempted to forcibly ‘settle’ these cultivators. Moreover, in light of these communal forms of resource ownership, Adivasis often did not benefit from the process of land reform initiated after Independence. In fact many of them actually suffered further loss of resources, as common lands were divided and distributed or Adivasi lands were recorded in the names of others. Lands over which Adivasis did have recorded ownership were also subjected further to a process of alienation.

With the expansion of people’s movements, some of which took the form of armed rebellion among the Adivasis of central India in the 1980’s, certain policy changes began to take place. In 1996 the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA) was passed, the provisions of which are described below. Subsequently, Indian forest laws also began undergoing a slow process of change in order to respond to people’s rights issues.  This process is described in the discussion on ‘forests’ in Section 7,’Land, natural resources and environment’ of Part II below.

But the story of India’s indigenous peoples is not just one of defeat and loss. For more than 150 years, the subcontinent has seen numerous mass struggles against injustice by indigenous peoples. These struggles have left their mark in the intricate, often inconsistent and incomplete framework of laws for Adivasi rights in India, laws that in some areas – such as gender or socioeconomic rights –  are far behind international law, while in others – such as autonomy in the Sixth Schedule or Articles 371A and 371G – seem to have been decades ahead. The experience of these policies, their formation and their operation, both at the level of policy and at the level of implementation, thus has much to teach both those interested in India’s indigenous peoples and those working for indigenous rights elsewhere

Some important revolts during the colonial period

• Kolis of Maharashtra (1784-85)
• Tamar of Chota Nagpur in present-day Jharkhand (1789, 1794-1795, 1801)
• Mundas of Jharkhand (1791, 1819-1820, 1832, 1867, 1889)
• Chuari Movement in Bihar (1795-1800)
• Bhumij Rebellion of Manbhum in Jharkhand (1798, 1834)
• Koyas in Andhra Pradesh (1803, 1862,  1879,  1880,  1822) 
• Tribal revolts in  Chotanagpur  of Jharkhand (1807- 1808, 1811, 1817, 1820)
• Bhils in Western India (1809-1828, 1846, 1857-1858)
• Kols in Chotanagpur  (1818,  1832-1833) 
• Singphos in Assam  (1825,  1828, 1843,  1849,  1869) 
• Mishmis in Arunachal Pradesh  (1827,  1855)
• Tribals of Assam (1828)
• Khasis of Assam and present day Meghalaya (1829)
• Kherwar uprising in Jharkhand (1832-1823)
• Lushais of Assam (1834-1841, 1842, 1850, 1860, 1871-1872, 1892)
• Daflas of Assam (1835, 1872- 1873)
• Naiks of Gujarat  (1838,  1868)
• Khampti in Assam (1839-1843)
• Gonds of Bastar  in  Chhattisgarh  (1842)
• Kondhs in Odisha  (1850)
• North Kachari hills of  Assam  (1854) 
• Santals in Jharkhand  (1855,  1869-1870) 
• Naikdas in Gujarat  (1858)
• Syntengs of the  Jaintia  Hills  of  Meghalaya  (1860-1862) 
• Phulaguri uprising in  Assam  (1861)
• Juangs in Odisha  (1861)
• Sentinel Islanders in  the  Andaman  Islands  (1867, 1883)
• Raig-mels of Assam (1868-1869)
• Sardari Andolan of Chotanagpur in Jharkhand (1875 – 1895)
• Nagas of Nagaland  (1879, 1932, 1963-1971) 
• Bastar tribal uprising in Chhattisgarh (1811) 
• Birsa Movement in Jharkhand (1895–1900)
• Tana Bhagat rebellion  in  Jharkhand (1912-1914,  1920,  1921) 
• Gond and Kolam  revolt  in  Andhra  Pradesh  (1941) 
• Koraput revolt in  Odisha (1942)
• Revolts against the Japanese occupation army by the tribes of the Andaman Islands (1942-1945)

Aside from mainstream political parties, a wide variety of other organizations are active in organizing  Adivasis and indigenous peoples across India in response to the threats to their rights and existence, though many neither accept nor use the discourse of indigenous rights to describe their work. Roughly, the country can be divided into five zones, within each of which a particular type of organization is dominant.

These are:

• The central-western region, comprising the states of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. In these large states, drawing upon a history of left-wing mobilizations and people’s movements, Adivasi mobilizations tend to be dominated by what are usually described as ‘movement organisations’ or ‘mass organizations’. These are typically unregistered grassroots organizations that do not receive institutional funding. They are usually membership-based and regional in scope, organizing people at the level of the village and usually focused on issues of land rights, forest rights, migrant labour issues and resistance to displacement.
• The eastern-central region, comprising the states of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh. In these states, the organization with the largest spread of influence among Adivasis (despite a recent decline in Andhra Pradesh) is the Communist Party of India (Maoist), an armed guerilla organization that follows a path of protracted people’s war aimed at the overthrow of the state. The Maoists do not use the terminology or concepts of indigenous peoples’ rights, though some strands of their movement and friendly parties use the concept of the Adivasis as a separate identity / nationality. Aside from the Maoists, there are peoples’ movements (in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh particularly) largely targeting land acquisition and consequent displacement for industries, primarily mining industries, and development projects such as dams. There are also NGOs working among Adivasis in these states. The state of Jharkhand in particular has a long history of people’s struggles, mostly organised around the theme of self-government and autonomy for the Adivasis of the area. The creation of the state of Jharkhand has, for the time being, led to the decline of many of these movements.
• The southern region, comprising of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala. In Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, the most widespread organizations are funded NGOs whose approach tends to be welfare and development-oriented. Some of these NGOs have adopted the language of indigenous peoples’ rights over the past two decades. The practice of these organizations, however, tends to avoid political mobilization and confrontation with the State. Kerala is an exception to this trend, with much fewer NGOs and instead a much larger presence of people’s organizations (described above). The situation in the eastern state of Odisha, meanwhile, resembles that of Tamil Nadu or Karnataka, though with a growing presence of the CPI (Maoist) in the western districts of the state.
• The Northeastern region, including the seven states of India’s northeast. In these states, multiple organizational forms coexist among the indigenous population: armed national liberation organizations, mass based membership organizations (which usually describe themselves as civil society groups), such as the powerful student unions, and traditional community organizations / governance institutions. These tend to operate in general coordination with one another, though they may have other differences. It is in the Northeast that the concepts and discourse of indigenous people’s rights are most widespread, particularly among communities such as the Nagas. In recent times, organizations have also emerged against various ‘development’ projects such as dams etc. Other parts of the country such as Gujarat, West Bengal, Himachal Pradesh etc. tend to follow one or the other pattern of those listed above.