NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice to the Union government and others on a PIL highlighting increasing occurrences of landslides and flashfloods, particularly in the States of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand and also in other Himalayan States.
A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and K Vinod Chandran told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to look into the matter, saying it was a serious matter.
The court also referred to media reports of large number of wooden logs flowing in Himachal Pradesh and, Uttarakhand, indicating illegal tree fellings.
"We have seen unprecedented landslides and floods in Uttarakhad, Himachal Pradesh and Punjab," the bench said.
The court sought a response from the Union government and Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Jammu and Kashmir governments on the PIL filed by Anamika Rana.
The petitioner, an environmentalist, contended she filed the instant plea in the larger public interest to ensure and to uphold the constitutional right to life (Article 21) and access to justice of the residents of these Himalayan States.
"The Himalayas in the state of Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand among others are ecologically sensitive mountains which are highly prone to adverse impacts of climate change. These Himalayas directly influence the weather, climatic conditions and other physical conditions of the plains of Northern India," it said.
The PIL pointed out, within barely a week of the monsoon rains, in 2025, massive and extensive fatal landslides have taken place in several districts of Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab.
The plea claimed one of the biggest causes of floods across the states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand are the obstructions caused by constructions and encroachments on/along the rivers, rivulets, streams, water, channels and courses and muck-dumping thereon, apart from muck-dumping on hill slopes and/or other open areas.
Also Watch
It claimed in spite of increase in frequency of the landslides, floods, cloudburst etc in these States in the past decades, there is no effective precautionary or preventive plan in place in these States for the prevention of these kinds of disaster or for mitigating the losses from these disasters.
The plea also sought constituting an expert committee, headed by a former judge of the Supreme Court, with adequate powers, to, inter alia, monitor, oversee, remedy the situation; such committee be of a permanent nature, with decentralised, multi-tier structural and functional framework.
The plea sought a direction for proper implementation of environmental laws, Disaster Management Act, 2005 and Sendai Framework guiding principles to preserve and protect the pristine and delicate ecology of the Himalayan States before it becomes too late.
The PIL also sought the formation of SIT involving experts to find out the reasons for the disasters and to determine the responsibilities of the officials and also to suggest measures that may help to protect and preserve the pristine and delicate ecology of the Himalayan States and which will also help in enforcement of the Rights given under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
It sought a direction to the concerned authorities to strictly adhere to the Hill Road Manual 1998 of the Indian Roads Congress and thickly vegetate all hill slopes across the state with suitable plant species as determined by the Forest Research Institute (FRI) or the Himalayan Forest Research Institute, and conduct massive afforestation on all hill slopes; undertake restorative, remedial measures for all the damages caused.
The plea pointed out, India is a signatory to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, which was adopted during the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in March 2015 to work towards making all stakeholders disaster resilient and significantly reduce the loss of lives and assets. India is committed to achieving the seven goals set under the framework through systematic and sustainable efforts, it said.
Disclaimer: This content is produced and published by LawStreet Journal Media for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The views expressed are independent of any legal practice of the individuals involved.
