HC gives Haryana time till December 31 to notify reserved forest in Morni Hills
The Punjab and Haryana high court has given the Haryana government time till December 31 to identify and notify reserved forest area in Morni Hills. The court criticised the inaction by Haryana government in not completing the exercise even as notification was done in 1987. (HT File)
'The Morni Hills are serving as the prime green cover, acting as lungs for the tri-city of Chandigarh, Panchkula & Mohali. Indubitably, the authorities are required to take a decision, one way or the other, regarding completion of the process which begins with the issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the 1927 Act and culminates upon a notification issued under Section 20 of the 1927 Act,' the bench presided over by chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel said while adding that the forest secretary of the state would file a compliance report about the same within seven months. '… failure wherein may invite punitive consequences (as per law) for the officer concerned as also other functionaries,' it added while fixing the second week of January, 2026, for filing the compliance affidavit.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed in 2017 by one Vijay Bansal, a Panchkula resident, who had demanded settlement of the area as prescribed under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. The area was formerly a part of the Sirmaur district in Himachal Pradesh and became a part of Haryana in 1966. In December 1987, the government issued a notification of reserved forest area. However, the process of demarcation has not been completed even now, the plea had said.
The court made it clear that demarcation and survey is to be done by the forest settlement officer (FSO) and not by the revenue authorities, as being claimed by the state government. The appointment of FSO was made in 2018.
The court criticised the inaction by Haryana government in not completing the exercise even as notification was done in 1987. 'To permit nearly four decades to elapse without any discernible, substantive action flowing from a statutory declaration is, to put it mildly, an affront to the principles of effective governance and a manifest failure at the end of officers, both statutory and Constitutional. Such inaction on the part of such officers, particularly in a matter of such profound public importance, merits the unequivocal condemnation of this court,' the bench observed, deprecating 'in the strongest possible terms, the protracted official lethargy and its discernible unwillingness to discharge its solemn responsibilities' of identifying the area.
The court has now directed that the FSO be handed over all the documents regarding demarcation and survey which are in the possession of the revenue authorities, forest authorities and Survey of India and he be provided with requisite facilities and infrastructure to enable him to make inquiry, entry, survey, demarcation, and prepare map and acquire land so that reserved forest notification is issued and published in the official gazette by the given deadline.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
HC gives Haryana time till December 31 to notify reserved forest in Morni Hills
The Punjab and Haryana high court has given the Haryana government time till December 31 to identify and notify reserved forest area in Morni Hills. The court criticised the inaction by Haryana government in not completing the exercise even as notification was done in 1987. (HT File) 'The Morni Hills are serving as the prime green cover, acting as lungs for the tri-city of Chandigarh, Panchkula & Mohali. Indubitably, the authorities are required to take a decision, one way or the other, regarding completion of the process which begins with the issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the 1927 Act and culminates upon a notification issued under Section 20 of the 1927 Act,' the bench presided over by chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel said while adding that the forest secretary of the state would file a compliance report about the same within seven months. '… failure wherein may invite punitive consequences (as per law) for the officer concerned as also other functionaries,' it added while fixing the second week of January, 2026, for filing the compliance affidavit. The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed in 2017 by one Vijay Bansal, a Panchkula resident, who had demanded settlement of the area as prescribed under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. The area was formerly a part of the Sirmaur district in Himachal Pradesh and became a part of Haryana in 1966. In December 1987, the government issued a notification of reserved forest area. However, the process of demarcation has not been completed even now, the plea had said. The court made it clear that demarcation and survey is to be done by the forest settlement officer (FSO) and not by the revenue authorities, as being claimed by the state government. The appointment of FSO was made in 2018. The court criticised the inaction by Haryana government in not completing the exercise even as notification was done in 1987. 'To permit nearly four decades to elapse without any discernible, substantive action flowing from a statutory declaration is, to put it mildly, an affront to the principles of effective governance and a manifest failure at the end of officers, both statutory and Constitutional. Such inaction on the part of such officers, particularly in a matter of such profound public importance, merits the unequivocal condemnation of this court,' the bench observed, deprecating 'in the strongest possible terms, the protracted official lethargy and its discernible unwillingness to discharge its solemn responsibilities' of identifying the area. The court has now directed that the FSO be handed over all the documents regarding demarcation and survey which are in the possession of the revenue authorities, forest authorities and Survey of India and he be provided with requisite facilities and infrastructure to enable him to make inquiry, entry, survey, demarcation, and prepare map and acquire land so that reserved forest notification is issued and published in the official gazette by the given deadline.
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Morni Hills: HC mandates forest demarcation, settlement of people's rights by year-end
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has ordered complete demarcation of the boundary of the forest and settlement of the rights of the people in the Morni Hills area by Dec 31. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now In its detailed order, the HC has empowered the forest settlement officer (FSO) to, forthwith, take requisite steps to ensure expeditious submission of his report. Thereafter the state shall issue notification under Section 20 of Indian Forest Act 1927 of the scheduled land as a reserved forest latest by Dec 31. "The FSO shall be handed over all the documents qua demarcation and survey which are presently in possession of the revenue authorities, forest authorities and Survey of India and the FSO shall be provided, forthwith, with all requisite facilities/infrastructure to enable him to discharge his duties contemplated in Chapter II of 1927 Act including making inquiry, entry, survey, demarcation, preparing map, acquiring land and exercising powers of a civil court, etc," the HC has clarified in its detailed order released on Friday. The court has also clarified that there will be complete ban on all non-forest activities in the Morni Hills area till the completion of the process. The secretary of the Haryana forest department has been asked to file a compliance affidavit, in terms of the directions made hereinabove, within seven months from, failure wherein may invite punitive consequences. Division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel has passed these orders while disposing of a petition filed by a local activist Vijay Bansal. He had sought directions to conduct the settlement, in terms of Punjab Land Revenue Act 1887 and Punjab Settlement Manual, of Morni Hills area and incidental directions. Counsel for the petitioner, advocate Ravi Sharma submitted that the residents of Morni Hills area come within the definition of traditional forest dwellers for all intents and purposes, but no efforts have been made to treat them as such. The prime issue before the HC was as to whether the settlement of the Morni Hills area, including the process of demarcation, is required to be carried out entirely by the FSO alone, and expeditiously or not. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The state government had raised the objection, that FSO has no jurisdiction to conduct demarcation & survey of the area proposed to be proclaimed as reserved forest, and the said power lies within the exclusive domain of the revenue authorities, it would be apt to deal with this objection. Rejecting the state's stand, the bench observed that once a special law i.e. Indian Forest Act 1927 is enacted covering the entire subject matter of Reserved Forest, the FSO assumes exclusive jurisdiction for performing all substantive and ancillary functions including demarcation and survey. "The entire exercise of survey and demarcation being done by Revenue Authorities is required to be handed over to the FSO already appointed, who shall henceforth conduct & conclude the survey, demarcation, preparation of maps and discharging all functions under Chapter II of 1927 Act," held the bench. Expressing shock over the delay on the part of the officers of the state government officials for delay in completing the process, the HC observed that such inaction on the part of such officers, particularly in a matter of such profound public importance, merits the unequivocal condemnation of this court. "The State, as the ultimate custodian and protector of its citizens' rights, is endowed with a solemn responsibility to act with dispatch and diligence, especially when confronted with issues of pressing environmental concern. The prolonged failure to finalize the process initiated by the December 18, 1987 notification, undermines the very spirit of the 1927 Act and betrays a shocking lack of urgency," the HC has observed. Lungs of Tricity "The Morni Hills are serving as the prime green cover acting as lungs for the Tricity of Chandigarh-Panchkula-Mohali. Indubitably, the authorities are required to take a decision, one way or the other, regarding completion of the process which begins with issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the 1927 Act and culminates upon a notification issued under Section 20 of the 1927 Act," HC said. The delay Nov 1966 | Haryana came into being. The hilly area of Morni block was included in the then Ambala district though the area was akin to the semi area of the Himachal Pradesh, as their problems are also of similar nature, one of them being the problem of "Nau-Taur". The state of Himachal Pradesh has solved the problem of "NauTaur" land and rights of its people long ago. Nau-Taur means the right to utilise with the sanction of the competent authority, waste land owned by the government outside the towns. Oct 15, 1980 | The then Haryana CM made a declaration regarding the rights of "Nau-Taur" to be given to the people of Morni area on the public demand. 1987-88 | A committee headed by then commissioner Ambala division submitted a detailed report regarding the rights of people of Morni Area which is known as T D Jogpal report and recommended the immediate fresh settlement. Nov 30, 1987 | The revenue department appointed then sub-divisional officer (civil) Kalka as settlement officer Morni Hills in addition to his duties. However, the process has not been completed till date in spite of spending crores of rupees on salary and allowances. After SDM Kalka, one M P Sharma, a retired Indian Forest Services (IFS) officer was appointed by the government as an 'FSO'.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Filing of PILs inappropriate when statutory remedies are available: HC
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana high court has held that invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction by way of a public interest litigation (PIL) is inappropriate and impermissible when a robust and adequate statutory framework already exists for redressal of a particular grievance. "Allowing unfettered recourse to PIL in such instances would amount to a judicial usurpation of legislative foresight and undermine the primary responsibility of the legislature to craft laws. Bypassing these meticulously designed mechanisms through PIL circumvents the intended architecture of grievance redressal and potentially dilutes the role of expert authorities," the high court has said. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel has passed the orders on a petition filed by one Anuj Malik and others. The petitioner sought directions to restrain all online opinion trading platforms, mobile applications, websites, and digital mediums from advertising, promoting, or marketing betting and wagering activities through platforms, including YouTube, X (Twitter), Instagram, Facebook, radio, print media, television, in blatant violation of statutory laws. They argued that despite a robust legal framework in place, the law was being flouted through misleading advertisements and unregulated financial systems. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Brigade Grand Dreams 2025 | 12 Month Payment Holiday* Brigade Group Learn More Undo The petitioners further submitted that if appropriate action was not undertaken, such platforms would continue to dupe gullible users. Responding to the plea, the govt informed that there already exists a legal and statutory framework within which any aggrieved person can approach the authorities concerned for redressal of any grievances, as raised by the petitioner. The govt counsel specifically drew the attention of the court to The Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025, which has been notified from April 9, 2025, and submitted that without adverting to the existing statutory framework, approaching this court by way of PIL amounts to bypassing the legislative mandate. After hearing the matter, the bench disposed of the petition, asking the petitioner to raise his grievance before the authorities concerned in terms of extant laws. BOX 'Unwarranted proliferation of litigation' Encouraging indiscriminate PILs, despite available statutory remedies, leads to an unwarranted proliferation of litigation, a burden on constitutional courts, as well as a judicial docket explosion. These risks transform constitutional courts into primary redressal fora rather than their intended role as ultimate arbiters of constitutional questions. Judicial resources, being scant and precious, must be conserved for matters of genuine public importance MSID:: 121975661 413 |
