NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Monday strongly criticised the Uttarakhand government for remaining a “silent spectator” for nearly two decades as forest land in Rishikesh was allegedly encroached upon, saying the situation prima facie pointed to a nexus between the executive and squatters. The court also sought detailed information on illegal constructions in the area.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the facts appeared to show how private individuals systematically grabbed thousands of acres of forest land while the state government remained inactive between 2000 and 2023.
Appearing for the state, Uttarakhand deputy advocate general Jatinder Kumar Sethi told the court that around 500 acres of forest land had been recovered from encroachers in 2023, with another 50 acres reclaimed during a recent drive carried out over the past three days in Rishikesh. He said the anti-encroachment drive would continue.
The bench, however, said the prolonged, unauthorised enjoyment of residential rights over vast stretches of forest land for more than 20 years suggested collusion involving politicians, bureaucrats and encroachers. It directed the state to file a comprehensive affidavit detailing the extent of encroachment, the nature of constructions raised, and the officers responsible for safeguarding government land in the area between 2000 and 2023.
Of the 2,866 acres notified as forest land, a portion had been leased to Pashulok Sewa Samiti, an organisation linked to the Pashulok Ashram founded by British-born Gandhian Mira Behn (Madeleine Slade). After the society went into liquidation, 594 acres were surrendered to the forest department on October 23, 1984. Despite this, the court noted, certain private individuals subsequently took control of the land.
In an earlier order, the bench had remarked that it was “shocking” that the Uttarakhand authorities stood by as forest land was “systematically grabbed” in full view of the administration. Expanding the scope of the petition, the court had directed the state’s chief secretary and principal chief conservator of forests to constitute an inquiry committee and submit a report.
Pending further orders, the court had restrained all private individuals from alienating or encumbering the land or creating third-party rights, and barred any construction activity. It also ordered that vacant land, excluding existing residential houses, be taken over by the forest department and the concerned district collector.
