HC orders relocation of encroachers settled at SNGP after 2011
The Bombay high court on Tuesday ordered the state government to identify alternate land for rehabilitation of encroachers at the Sanjay Gandhi National Park, within six weeks.
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Tuesday ordered the state government to identify alternate land for rehabilitation of encroachers at the Sanjay Gandhi National Park, within six weeks.

Criticising the government’s continuous non-compliance to court orders from 1997 till now, the court raised concerns over the alleged commercial activities going on within the park. The court also ordered relocation of encroachers, who settled at the park after 2011.
The court was following up on the contempt petition filed by Conservation Action Trust in 2023, in relation to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Samyak Janhit Seva Sanstha in 1995, pertaining to government’s inaction in rehabilitating slum dwellers despite several court orders over the years. The petition raised objections to the constructions of rehabilitation tenements on land within SGNP.
Advocate general Birendra Saraf on Tuesday informed the court that a meeting was held by the National Wildlife Board after the last hearing on Friday, to contemplate the declaration of a zonal master plan under the provision of the 2016 notification. He submitted that although the zonal master plan has not been submitted yet, several construction projects have been allowed by the National Wildlife Board in the past. “Based on this, we had planned to proceed with our project of constructing the rehabilitation tenements,” he said.
As per a notification issued on December 5, 2016, the government of India declared any construction in ‘eco-sensitive zone’ illegal.
He submitted that it has been directed to the authorities not to entertain any construction proposals till the zonal master plan for the ‘eco-sensitive zone’ is prepared. A meeting, chaired by the chief secretary, was held again on January 10, 2025, where it was discussed to find alternate land for the construction within four weeks.
Senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas raised contentious objections on the irresponsible attitude of the government. “Government should have been a little more responsible. They knew about the 2016 notification and still decided to go ahead with the construction plan. Moreover, they have not complied with the earlier court orders. It should not have come from us, as petitioners, to inform the government about the 2016 notification. It is not our job to ensure that the government follows court orders”, he said.
He further pointed out the statutory rule which states that the encroachers, claiming accommodation, are actually benefitting off the taxpayers’ money. “People have to pay taxes and buy accommodation from their hard-earned money, while the encroachers are being provided accommodation for free by the government”, he said.
He informed the court about the alleged commercial activities going on inside the park, particularly the establishment of markets, selling of rehabilitation tenements, and the establishment of a ready-mix cement plants, operating from within the park.
He questioned the state over the delay in the fencing plan, alleging the non- desirability of the state to save the park. “We need to protect our heritage. It is a waste if we have to remind the government to protect the park at every stage from 1997 till now. The government is, in fact, here to destroy it, not protect it”, he added.
The division bench of chief justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and justice Amit Borkar, questioned the state over the non-implementation of the fencing project. “It shows the slackness of the authorities. It is not the court’s job to issue such directions all the time, it is your duty. Your officers do not understand the language of the court. What could be of more importance than this? This is not compliance, this is total defiance”, the court said.
Advocate Hitendra Gandhi, representing Samyak Janhit Seva Sanstha, informed HT that the court passed an order on Monday, directing the state to identify an alternate land within six weeks and further file an affidavit, explaining the steps to be taken to ensure smooth operation of the rehabilitation process. “The court further ordered the state to identify the encroachers who settled at the location after the cut-off date and relocate them. Moreover, the advocate general has filed an affidavit seeking apology for non-complainants of court’s orders”.

Stay updated with all the Breaking News and Latest News from Mumbai. Click here for comprehensive coverage of top Cities including Bengaluru, Delhi, Hyderabad, and more across India along with Stay informed on the latest happenings in World News.
Stay updated with all the Breaking News and Latest News from Mumbai. Click here for comprehensive coverage of top Cities including Bengaluru, Delhi, Hyderabad, and more across India along with Stay informed on the latest happenings in World News.