NEW DELHI, Dec. 16 — The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside a Himachal Pradesh High Court order directing the removal of fruit-bearing orchards from encroached forest land, ruling that the decision had far-reaching consequences for marginalised and landless people.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the high court erred in passing the order, noting that it affected vulnerable sections of society and involved issues falling within the policy domain.
“The high court should not have passed the impugned order,” the bench said, adding that the directive had “drastic consequences” for those dependent on orchard-based livelihoods.
The court asked the Himachal Pradesh government to prepare a proposal for the Centre to extend assistance to marginalised and landless people impacted by the issue. It, however, clarified that the state was free to take action against encroachment on forest land in accordance with law.
The ruling brought relief to thousands of apple growers across the state. The Supreme Court was hearing a petition filed by former Shimla deputy mayor Tikender Singh Panwar and activist advocate Rajiv Rai, who had challenged the high court’s July 2 order directing the Forest Department to remove apple orchards from encroached forest land and replace them with forest species. The high court had also ordered recovery of costs from encroachers as arrears of land revenue.
The petitioners had described the high court’s order as “arbitrary, disproportionate and violative of constitutional, statutory and environmental principles,” warning of irreversible ecological and socio-economic damage in the ecologically fragile Himalayan state.
They argued that the blanket removal of fruit-bearing trees without a comprehensive environmental impact assessment violated the precautionary principle of environmental law and increased the risk of landslides and soil erosion, particularly during the monsoon season.
“Apple orchards are not merely encroachments. They contribute to soil stability, support biodiversity and form the backbone of Himachal Pradesh’s economy,” the petitioners said, adding that large-scale felling threatened the constitutional right to livelihood under Article 21.
The Supreme Court had earlier stayed the high court’s order on July 28 and allowed the state government to auction fruit from the harvest. Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu had also said the state was not in favour of felling fruit-laden trees and supported auctioning produce instead.
According to the petition, more than 3,800 apple trees had already been felled in areas including Chaithla, Kotgarh and Rohru, with plans to remove up to 50,000 trees statewide, triggering public concern and criticism.
