In a scathing observation, the Supreme Court of India has accused the Uttarakhand state government and its authorities of acting as "silent spectators" while vast tracts of notified forest land are being systematically grabbed. The bench, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi, expressed shock at the inaction and ordered an immediate halt to all construction activities on the disputed land.
Court's Stern Rebuke and Immediate Directives
The apex court's remarks came during a hearing concerning the alleged illegal encroachment of 2,866 acres of forest land in Rishikesh. "What seems shocking to us is that the State of Uttarakhand and its Authorities are sitting as silent spectators when the forest land is being systematically grabbed in front of their eyes," the bench stated. Taking suo motu cognizance to widen the scope of the case, the court issued formal notice to the state.
The court directed the Chief Secretary of Uttarakhand and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to form a special inquiry committee. This committee is tasked with investigating all aspects of the land grab and submitting a detailed report. As an interim measure, the bench passed a restraining order prohibiting all private individuals from selling, transferring, or creating any third-party rights on the disputed land.
"It goes without saying that no construction activity shall be allowed to take place either," the order explicitly stated. The court further mandated that the Forest Department and the local Collector take possession of all vacant land, excluding existing residential houses. A comprehensive compliance report has been ordered to be submitted before the next hearing scheduled for January 5.
Historical Background of the Pashulok Land Case
The complex case has its roots in 1950 when the large 2,866-acre land parcel was leased to the Pashulok Sewa Samiti, a society intended to allot plots to landless poor families in the Rishikesh area. However, in 1984, the forest department of the undivided Uttar Pradesh government withdrew this allotment, and the society surrendered 594 acres back to the department.
The controversy reignited in 2001 when private individuals, including petitioner Anita Kandwal, allegedly took possession of parts of this land. The forest department subsequently moved an application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Rishikesh. The legal battle reached the Uttarakhand High Court, which, on November 14, ruled that Kandwal had encroached upon government land that had already reverted to the state in 1984, affirming she had no right to the property. This High Court order prompted the appeal to the Supreme Court.
Broader Implications for Forest Conservation
The Supreme Court's strong intervention highlights a critical failure in the state's land and forest governance machinery. The case is not just about a single land parcel but points to a potential systematic failure in protecting notified forest areas from encroachment. The court's decision to expand the proceedings suo motu indicates its intent to examine the issue in a broader context, possibly setting a precedent for how similar cases of environmental land grabs are handled nationwide.
The immediate directives to stop construction and reclaim vacant land are crucial steps to prevent further irreversible damage to the forest ecosystem. The upcoming inquiry committee's report and the state's compliance by January 5 will be closely watched, determining the next phase of legal action and accountability for the alleged lapses by Uttarakhand authorities.
