[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Bhaskaranand Joshi vs Union Of India And & Others on 11 March, 2026
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY
11th March, 2026
Writ Petition (PIL) No. 28 of 2026
Bhaskaranand Joshi ------Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and & others -----Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. S.K.Mandal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of
India/respondent no.1.
Mr. Amrendra Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General assisted by
Shri S.M.S.Mehta, learned Brief Holder for the State/respondent nos.
2,3 4 and 5.
ORDER:
(per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
1. The present Public Interest Litigation has
been filed alleging that private respondents no. 8 & 9
have carried out illegal felling of trees and cutting of
mountain for construction of a private road and the
District Administration has failed to take any action
against them. The private respondents no. 8 & 9 are
stated to be having considerable political influence and
have used JCB machine through dense forest about
1000 meters in length in carving the road.
2. Learned State counsel has placed on record
the instructions received from Tehsildar, Thal. According
to it, on complaint of the villagers dated 23.02.2026,
the site was got inspected by a joint team of Revenue
and Forest officials and in which, it transpired that the
private respondents have cut the mountain using JCB
machine and have felled trees. In the process, they
have covered 150x2.50 = 375 sq. mts of land. It is
stated that 300 sq. mts out of the said land belongs to
State Government and 75 sq. mts to Van Panchayat. It
is further stated that there has been no laxity on part
of the officials as soon after the inspection they have
initiated legal action against the private respondents.
In support of the said plea, a communication sent by
Tehsildar, Thal to S.D.M., Berinag dated 25.02.2026
has been annexed, in which recommendation has been
made for initiating proceedings against the private
respondents under Section 23C of the Mines and
Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
3. It is admitted in the instructions furnished by
Tehsildar, Thal that the private respondents were not
having any permission for the same.
4. Another set of instructions has been placed
on record and it is by the Divisional Forest Officer,
Pithoragarh Forest Division, Pithoragarh. In the said
instructions also, the illegal felling of trees and cutting
of mountain by private respondents using JCB machine
to construct a private road is admitted. It is also
admitted that the private respondents have thereby
covered 150 meters x 2.50 meters of the land. The
stand taken is that after the aforesaid illegalities came
to the notice of the respondents they initiated
immediate action by registering a Range Case No.
32/Beri/2025-26 under Section 28 (1) (3) and Section
33 (1) (C) of the Indian Forest (Uttaranchal
Amendment) Act, 2001; it is stated that investigation is
currently in progress and further action would be taken
in the matter as per law. It is also admitted that no
permission for felling of trees was granted at any stage
in favour of private respondents. It is further stated
that in respect of Van Panchayat land the legal
ownership is with the Revenue Department and
therefore, further action in the matter would be taken
by the Revenue department under the prevalent laws of
the State.
5. It is abundantly clear that mountain has been
cut and trees have been felled for constructing a
private road, by use of JCB and manpower. The area
covered is 350 sq.mts. The length of the track which
has been constructed is 150 mts and the width is 2.50
meters as admitted by the State-respondents
themselves.
6. It is really surprising that such huge area of
mountain land has been covered for constructing a
private road without any permission under applicable
laws, but the officials of Revenue department and the
Forest department, who are custodian of the public land
and forest were not aware of the same, till a private
complaint came to be filed. It cannot be accepted that
when heavy machinery like JCB was used for cutting
the mountain and felling of the trees, the custodian of
the public wealth would not even come to know of the
illegal activity. The matter assumes additional
significance as we notice that the alleged activity
though cognizable offence, so far no First Information
Report has been registered and the Revenue
department appears to have only made
recommendation for registering case against the
private respondents under the provisions of Mines and
Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and
Indian Forest (Uttaranchal Amendment) Act, 2001.
7. The role of both the Revenue department and
the Forest department requires thorough investigation
by the State Government and the persons responsible
for inaction and indolence have to be identified and
punished.
8. Accordingly, we direct respondent no. 2 to
issue necessary instructions to concerned officials for
registering First Information Report, if not already
registered, and hold a fact finding inquiry and identify
the persons who were responsible for keeping vigil over
the mountain land and preserving the flora and fauna
of the area but have failed to discharge their duties and
take appropriate action against them.
9. The Principal Secretary, Department of
Forest, Uttarakhand shall file his personal affidavit
along with status report by the next date.
10. List on 01.04.2026.
11. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union
of India shall also obtain instructions and assist the
Court in the matter. In the meanwhile, it shall be
ensured that no further construction takes place at the
site.
12. Issue notice to the private respondents no. 8
& 9 by normal mode as well as by registered post
returnable by the next date.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)
Dated: 11.03.2026
Kaushal
