Taking a stern view of the state administration’s alleged procedural lapses in removing encroachments, the Uttarakhand High Court has summoned the State Chief Secretary to explain why demolition drives are being conducted without prior notice to the affected parties.
The directive came on Monday from a division bench comprising Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Subhash Upadhyay, who were hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning illegal encroachments across the state.
The core legal issue raised before the Court was the state’s alleged failure to follow due process while executing removal orders. During the hearing, the petitioners informed the Bench that authorities were demolishing structures identified as encroachments without issuing statutory notices or providing the occupants an opportunity to be heard.
The petitioners argued that this approach stands in direct violation of the Supreme Court’s specific directions regarding demolition procedures, which mandate adherence to the principles of natural justice.
Taking serious note of these submissions, the High Court directed the Chief Secretary of Uttarakhand to appear before the Bench via video conferencing. The top bureaucrat has been asked to file a response addressing the claims that the administration is bypassing the directions of the Apex Court while carrying out these drives.
The ongoing legal proceedings stem from the High Court’s earlier cognizance of rampant illegal encroachments on forest land, state highways, national highways, and revenue land throughout Uttarakhand.
Initially, the Court had taken note of encroachments specifically in the Padampuri area of Nainital on forest department land and public spots. Expanding the scope of the matter, the Court had subsequently issued comprehensive directions to all District Magistrates and Divisional Forest Officers (DFOs). They were instructed to identify and remove illegal structures from public and forest lands across the state and submit compliance reports.
However, to ensure fairness in the process, the Bench had previously directed the State Government to constitute district-level committees. These committees were tasked with conducting hearings on identified encroachments to ensure that genuine claims were examined before any coercive action was taken.
The current controversy arises from the administration’s alleged failure to utilize these committees and follow the notice-and-hearing protocol before deploying bulldozers.
