Forest Land Grabbed in Broad Daylight While State Remains a Spectator: Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Uttarakhand Land Case

“What Seems Shocking to Us Is That the State of Uttarakhand and Its Authorities Are Sitting as Silent Spectator When the Forest Land Is Being Systematically Grabbed in Front of Their Eyes”, On December 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of India, in a strong-worded interim order in Anita Kandwal v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr., Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 21058/2025, took suo motu cognizance of large-scale forest land encroachment in Uttarakhand. While hearing a petition arising from a dispute over land possession and title, the Court observed that private individuals had “systematically grabbed thousands of acres of forest land” with apparent indifference from the State authorities. The Vacation Bench comprising Chief Justice and Justice Joymalya Bagchi directed a wide-ranging enquiry into what appears to be an orchestrated scheme of illegal possession and regularisation based on a "collusive decree."

The matter stems from a long-standing controversy involving the leasing and re-allotment of notified government forest land, which had long been surrendered to the Forest Department but was nonetheless being claimed and occupied by private parties.

“Land Measuring 2866 Acres Was Notified as Government Forest Land, Yet Possession Was Taken by Private Individuals”

The Supreme Court began by recounting the alarming factual scenario. A large tract of forest land, approximately 2866 acres, had been officially notified as government property. At one point, a portion of this land was allegedly leased to Pashulok Sewa Samiti, a Rishikesh-based society. This society, in turn, is said to have further parceled out parts of the land to its members.

A dispute arose between the Samiti and its alleged members, which culminated in a suspicious “compromise decree,” now viewed by the Court as possibly “collusive.” Importantly, the society was eventually liquidated, and by way of a formal deed dated October 23, 1984, it surrendered 594 acres of land back to the Forest Department. This surrender had attained finality in law.

Nevertheless, despite this legal closure, individuals like the petitioner Anita Kandwal allegedly took possession of the forest land as late as in 2001. Respondent No. 2 also staked claim based on the aforementioned decree, which now appears dubious.

Supreme Court Expands the Scope: "We Propose to Enlarge the Scope of These Proceedings Suo Motu"

In a significant development, the Court invoked its suo motu powers to expand the inquiry beyond the individual dispute. Taking serious note of governmental apathy, the Bench remarked:

“What seems shocking to us is that the State of Uttarakhand and its Authorities are sitting as silent spectator when the forest land is being systematically grabbed in front of their eyes.”

Recognising the public interest implications and systemic irregularities, the Bench directed the Chief Secretary of Uttarakhand and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest to constitute an Enquiry Committee. This Committee is tasked with examining all aspects of the land occupation and encroachment, and a detailed report is to be submitted to the Court.

"No Construction Activity Shall Be Allowed… Vacant Land Shall Be Taken into Possession": Court Issues Stringent Interim Measures

Pending further consideration, the Court imposed strict interim measures to prevent further alienation or manipulation of the land in question. These directions include:

• Restraining all private individuals from alienating, encumbering, or creating third-party rights in the land.
• Prohibiting any form of construction activity.
• Ordering that vacant land (excluding residential houses) be taken into possession by the Forest Department and the concerned Collector.
• Requiring submission of a compliance report to the Court before the next hearing.

These proactive steps reflect the Court's commitment to upholding the integrity of forest land and preventing what it described as a “systematic grabbing” of public property under the guise of private title claims.

The Supreme Court’s order in Anita Kandwal v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr. marks a judicial crackdown on land encroachments dressed as legal transactions. By expanding the scope of a private land title dispute into a larger public interest case, and calling out state inaction in blunt terms, the judgment reflects a deep institutional concern over the misuse of legal processes to regularise illegal occupation of forest land. The matter is now slated for further hearing on January 5, 2026, by which time the authorities must report their compliance and findings.

Date of Decision: 22 December 2025