3 min readDehradunApr 2, 2026 06:55 AM IST
Observing that trees cannot be felled without the permission of the forest department, Uttarakhand High Court Wednesday stayed the felling of oak trees in Mussoorie by the municipal council for construction activities.
The matter was heard after a public interest litigation was filed by Pravesh Rana, the president of the students’ union of MPG College, where the felling allegedly took place. The counsel for the petitioner, advocate Abhijay Negi, said that the proposed construction was for a road and playground, resulting in the felling of several trees, without ascertaining whether they could be transplanted.
The petitioner also had filed an application under the Right to Information with the Divisional Forest Officer of Mussoorie to seek confirmation on whether an NOC was provided by the department to the Municipal Council to fell the trees. The department replied that no NOC was sought. The petition claimed that the construction appears to be undertaken for extraneous considerations, including facilitating adjoining private establishments such as hotels.
The petitioner further said that an NOC is mandatory under the United Provinces Private Forest Act, 1948, adding that many of the premium boarding schools have retained the forest areas as they were private forests.
The municipal council had floated a tender for a contractor for the services in January. While the counsel for the council said that the work has been stopped and they are consulting with the forest department regarding the control of the land, the bench of Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay asked how they were examining it at this point when a tender has been floated, and trees have already been felled.
The MPG College, Mussoorie campus, overlaps with the notified Hussain Ganj Forest Estate. The forest land under the United Provinces Private Forest Act, 1948, has been declared to be “forest”. Under section 5 of the act, the rights of any other person to cut, collect or remove trees, timber or other forest produce in or from, or to pasture cattle in any area or forest relating to “forest” must be undertaken in compliance with the provisions of the Act, the petitioner argued.
The counsel for the council said that the records show that the trails were under their control.
Story continues below this ad
The high court said: “It may be under your control, but how can you carry on felling of trees without permission of the forest department?” The counsel refuted the petitioner’s claims and said that no tree has been felled for the construction. “The photographs don’t show that it is for construction,” he added.
However, the court said: “Why will he file photographs of trees felled elsewhere?” It also asked the council to file a reply and stayed the tree felling in the meantime.
