Expressing concern over the state’s failure to comply with the Supreme Court’s 2014 directions for identifying forest land in the ecologically fragile Shivalik foothills in Chandigarh’s vicinity, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has restrained all construction and development activities in 16 villages in the area.A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor also prohibited the transfer or alienation of land. It directed that no mutation entries be made for six weeks or until the forest land identification exercise was completed.The High Court told the Punjab Chief Secretary to constitute a team to determine the extent of forest land that existed on the date of enforcement of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The Bench ordered that the entire revenue record of the villages be kept in the safe custody of two senior officers heading the exercise and its photocopies be deposited with the High Court Registrar-General within a week. The Mohali Deputy Commissioner was told to appear in person with the records on the next date of hearing. The High Court warned that violation of its directions prohibiting land transfer would be treated as contempt.Hearing a bunch of public interest litigations and a writ petition, the Bench at the onset observed that the matters raised “serious environmental and ecological concerns in Chandigarh’s vicinity”. The petitioners alleged that while some restaurants had been shut down, “a large number of other commercial activities were allowed to flourish, with massive constructions being permitted in the area”. They alleged collusion by state officials, contending that several senior officers had secured prime farmland in the area.The High Court observed that Karoran village was situated in the foothills of the Shivalik Hills, and that the “manner in which the area was being allowed to be commercialised not only violated the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 (PLP Act), but also reflected failure on the part of the state to preserve the environment”.Holding that it “could not shut its eyes to the grievances”, the High Court observed that revenue and other state records prima facie showed land in Karoran, Nada, Parch, Jattvibek, Majrian, Choti Bari Nagal, Parol, Siswan, Pallanpur, Saini Majra, Dulwan, Burana, Gochar, Mirzapur, Tarapur and Sultanpur as forest land. It also said the demarcation was yet to be undertaken despite the Supreme Court’s directions in 2014.The Bench was assisted in the matter by senior advocates Anand Chibbar and DS Patwalia, along with other counsel, including Gauravjit S Patwalia and Munish Jolly. The Bench traced the genesis of the litigation to a January 22, 2004, newspaper report alleging that a club in Karoran village, then in Ropar district (now Mohali), had been established on forest land in violation of law.Taking suo motu cognisance in 2004, the High Court had then examined the nature of the land, referred to the provisions of the Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 (PLP Act), noted that the entire village land measuring about 3,700 acres was shown in the records as forest land, and directed its preservation as forest land.The Bench noted that the judgement was subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court in “BS Sandhu versus Government of India” case, which held that “the mere inclusion of the area within the limits of the PLP Act, 1900, did not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that the land was forest land”.The apex court held that the nature of the land as on the date of enforcement of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, had first to be determined, and directed the State of Punjab to undertake that exercise.