In a major reprieve for thousands of apple farmers in Himachal Pradesh, the Supreme Court on Monday stayed a Himachal Pradesh High Court order that had directed the removal of fruit-bearing apple orchards from encroached forest lands. The order had sparked concerns over environmental harm and economic disruption in the state.
A bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria issued the stay while hearing a plea filed by former Shimla deputy mayor Tikender Singh Panwar and environmental activist-lawyer Rajiv Rai.
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate P.V. Dinesh and advocate Subhash Chandran K.R. contended that the High Court’s July 2 order would lead to irreversible ecological and socio-economic damage, especially as it was being enforced during the monsoon season—a period highly vulnerable to landslides and soil erosion in the Himalayan state.
The High Court had directed the forest department to remove all orchards grown on forest land and replace them with indigenous forest species, with recovery of costs from the alleged encroachers as arrears of land revenue.
Calling the decision “arbitrary, disproportionate and violative of constitutional, statutory and environmental principles,” the petitioners argued that such large-scale deforestation without any Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was contrary to the precautionary principle of environmental jurisprudence.
“Apple orchards, far from being mere encroachments, contribute to soil stability, provide habitats for wildlife, and are a cornerstone of the state’s economy,” the petitioners said. They further warned that the removal of these trees not only threatened biodiversity and stability of fragile slopes but also jeopardised the livelihoods of thousands of small farmers, thereby infringing their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The plea highlighted that as of July 18, over 3,800 apple trees had already been felled in regions including Chaithla, Kotgarh, and Rohru, and the state was reportedly planning the removal of up to 50,000 more trees.
The petition also cited previous Supreme Court rulings, such as T N Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India and Coimbatore District Central Co-operative Bank, to argue that environmental and socio-economic assessments were necessary before implementing such drastic measures.
The issue had already drawn widespread public criticism, with Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu stating on July 17 that the state government was not in favour of felling fully fruit-laden apple trees. He had urged that time be granted for auctioning the produce instead.
