HC admonishes Haryana over 3.65% forest cover, orders ‘drastic remedial measures’
Haryana functionaries “neither serious nor conscious” of looming ecological crisis, says Punjab and Haryana HC; steps in amid ‘inactivity’
Admonishing Haryana for lack of seriousness towards environmental degradation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the state’s functionaries appeared to be displaying neither seriousness nor awareness of the looming ecological crisis.
The censure came as the bench headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu observed that the state’s forest cover was languishing at a mere 3.65 per cent of the geographical area. The court made it clear that such inaction warranted “drastic remedial measures”.
The observations form part of the HC’s ongoing effort to safeguard the region’s green cover. As part of this exercise, the court on April 1 prohibited the felling of “any tree of any age/species in the state of Haryana, including cutting of approximately 5,000 trees proposed to be cut for the construction of the Zirakpur–Panchkula bypass, without permission of this court.” The direction will remain in force till April 17, the next date of hearing.
The observation came after the court was apprised, based on the Indian State of Forest Report 2023, that Haryana’s forest cover stood at just 3.65 per cent.
Taking note of the submissions, the bench observed: “It appears that the functionaries of the state of Haryana are neither serious nor do they seem conscious of the impending ecological catastrophe”.
Flagging the administrative inertia, the bench went on to assert: “Inactivity of the respondents requires drastic remedial measures by this Court.”
Senior advocate Anand Chhibbar, along with counsel Karan Gaba, Ateevraj Sandhu, and Vijiyesh Malhotra, appeared for the petitioners before the bench in the matter, while the centre was represented by Additional Solicitor-General of India Satya Pal Jain.
The bench has, for long, been expressing concern over the steady erosion of green cover and environmental neglect. In an unrelated matter, the Bench had pointedly asked: “Do you not want your children or your grandchildren to survive?”
Striking a chord on inter-generational environmental responsibility, in another case, the court had bluntly queried the state and others present in the court: “Do you want your children and grandchildren to breathe fresh air?”
The high court has also been innovating on the remedial front, including imposing the planting of saplings as a condition for the grant of bail in appropriate cases, signaling a consistent judicial push to embed environmental accountability in governance and individual conduct.
