Decode Politics: Why a court order has upset Congress govt's applecart in Himachal

Indian Express

19 hours ago

In an unusual expression of helplessness Thursday, Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu said the state High Court 'does not listen to my government' and said he may approach the Supreme Court.
Sukhu's complaint was regarding the felling of fruit-laden trees across approximately 3,000 bighas — about 243 hectares — of 'encroached' forest land. On July 2, the High Court had directed state-wide removal of all apple trees and orchards that had come up on forest land.
The Himachal government tried arguing that the court order put at risk livelihoods, especially in a state that relies heavily on fruit production.
Himachal Pradesh's forest cover spans from the Shivalik foothills to the Pir Panjal ranges, totalling 37,033 sq km. As per an affidavit submitted to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in February 2025 Himachal's Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, the IFS officer Sameer Rastogi, there were 18,374 cases of encroachment on 5,689 hectares of forest land across the state.
The affidavit, which did not talk about the nature of the encroachments, said 9,903 – or nearly half – of the encroachments had been removed, reclaiming 3,097 hectares.
However, action against removal of encroachments has been sporadic at best, and runs into resistance by local communities which have been profiting by using the land to cultivate fruit.
The ongoing clearing of encroached land stems from two complaints, filed back in 2014 and 2015 and later converted into Public Interest Litigations (PILs).
On July 2, a Division Bench of Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Bipin C Negi ruled that 'fruit-bearing trees are not forest species' and directed the Forest Department to plant native forest species like deodar, chir, and kail after clearing the encroached areas.
The Division Bench further said, 'The needful be done at a war footing. The ongoing monsoon is a conducive period to plant forest species. The cost of removal — cutting, removal of stumps and plantation of forest species — can be recovered from the encroachers.'
Many of the felled trees were three to four decades old, farmers have pointed out, with the yields now destroyed just before harvesting.
'These trees were at their peak bearing stage. It takes 7 to 10 years for a new orchard to reach this maturity,' says a Chaithla-based orchardist, who saw trees over two bighas flattened.
Noted horticulturist Deepak Singha, who has hailed the High Court decision to evict the encroached forest land, cautioned that small farmers could bear the brunt of the drive. 'Big farmers who have encroached hundreds of bighas of forest land have become rich, but the small apple growers live hand to mouth. The government should come up with a policy for these growers,' Singha said.
Environment activist Guman Singh said he was 'not in favour of cutting down any kind of tree, be it forest species or fruit species'.
Himachal's economy rests on apple farming to a large extent, with the fruit accounting for 49% of the total area under fruit crops. Apples make up 85% of the state's fruit economy, which is valued at around Rs 4,000 crore.
With harvest season only weeks away, the tree-felling and the damage to their yields have left apple farmers distressed.
According to state government data, available in an affidavit submitted to the High Court, '3,659 apple and other fruit-bearing trees had been felled on encroached forest land till July 15'. This included land in Chaithla (2,456 trees felled), Rohru (713) and Kotgarh (490) – the three towns which constitute the main region for apple cultivation in Himachal.
As the Sukhu government tries to assess the overall impact of the drive on production this season, the CPI(M) is mobilising the smaller farmers, who own less than five bighas and whose land is among that cleared, in protest. Rakesh Singha, a senior CPI (M) leader and former MLA from Theog, has led multiple meetings under various farmer fronts.
While refraining from commenting directly on the High Court order, the CPI (M) has accused the state government of not having a policy to protect the interests of small fruit growers.
BJP MLA from Chopal (Shimla) and party spokesperson Balbir Singh Verma has said Sukhu's claim of going to the Supreme Court is 'merely political'. He pointed out that in January 2025, the High Court had offered the state the option to take possession of the fruit trees growing on encroached land. At the time, the government, through the Advocate General, expressed its inability to do so, claiming that its Forest and Revenue Departments were not in a position to manage or harvest fruit from such land.
This, Verma argued, effectively paved the way for court-ordered felling.
The BJP leader said the Congress government will have to pay a heavy price. The state is due to see panchayat elections next year.