Supreme Court Sets Aside 2016 Uttarakhand HC Directions On Forest Fire Control, Relegates Matter To HC For Monitoring

The Supreme Court today relegated to the Uttarakhand High Court a matter pertaining to forest fires in the State for issuance of appropriate directions and monitoring of periodic measures to control their menace.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed the order, after hearing Senior Advocate Rajiv Datta (applicant in person), Senior Advocate K Parmeswar (for CEC) and Uttarakhand Deputy Advocate General Jatinder Kumar Sethi.

Disposing of the matter, the Court set aside the 2016 judgment of the High Court, whereby a slew of directions were issued on the issue of forest fires. The bench observed that the High Court directions were issued 10 years back, and given the lapse of time and technological advancements, the directions required to be revisited.

The High Court, being aware of the local conditions would be in a better position to revisit the directions and recommend periodical measures, the Court said. It also added that Senior Advocate Rajiv Datta may assist the High Court as an Amicus.

During the hearing, Datta argued an application which questioned the State's lapse in preventing forest fires this year despite its earlier assurances to the Court and claims of preparedness. He claimed that there was a shortage of manpower and that the funds received by the state from the Union for disaster management were diverted elsewhere.

Notably, the senior counsel pointed to a forest fire which the authorities took 1 month to douse. "There is complete apathy...some beat people have to travel 30 kms on foot...atleast we should be prepared. That much they can do?", he posed.

K Parmeswar, on behalf of CEC, contended that the only remaining concern was of monitoring the steps taken by the state.

Uttarakhand Deputy AG, on the other hand, pointed to the steps taken by the authorities to prevent forest fires, as a result of which the frequency of the incidents has come down. He informed that the number of forest fires came down from 2186 in 2022 to 773 in 2023. Being a cyclic phenomenon, it increased to 1276 in 2024 and then decreased to 268 in 2025. This year, he said 654 forest fires had occurred.

The Deputy AG further mentioned pine needles as a major cause of forest fires and highlighted how the state has initiated steps for collection of pine needles so they can be used for creating equipment for domestic purposes. It was further stated that 12000 persons had been deployed for dealing with forest fires and 5600 recruited as fire watchers.

The Deputy AG also apprised that despite a stay on the High Court's directions, the State had already implemented most of the directions.

Hearing the parties, CJI Kant noted that occurrence of a forest fire may be an "Act of God", but the responsibility for controlling that fire and preventing future fires lies with man/authorities. It was further commented that some of the directions issued by the High Court were "impractical".

The CJI also noted that forest fires may occur due to unintentional human intervention and at times because of forest mafia. "Solution [now] is to create a local robust mechanism by the department and equally important is that it is monitored by the High Court", he said.

To recap, in the underlying case, the High Court took judicial notice of some news reports on frequent occurrence of forest fires in the state and the devastation caused to the forest wealth, ecology, economy and environment. After considering the affidavits of the Union and State governments, it proceeded to pass 26 directions, including - formation of a National Forest Policy, provision of sufficient funds to prevent and control forest fires, use of foam/other retardants to control forest fires, provision of fire fighting tools/fire proof clothing/machinery to forest officials, amendment in forest laws for exemplary punishment to poachers, etc.

The High Court's judgment of 2016, which contained these directions, was stayed by the Supreme Court in 2017. Today, the matter was finally closed, while partly allowing the state's appeal.

Case Title: THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR v. IN THE MATTER OF THE PROTECTION OF FOREST, ENVIRONMENT, ECOLOGY, WILDLIFE ETC. FROM THE FOREST FIRE ETC., CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 1249/2019