The State holds a paramount constitutional and statutory duty to preserve natural water bodies. This includes the obligation to verify historical records, identify and remove illegal encroachments, rectify revenue entries, and restore such lands to their functional state as water resources to ensure environmental sustainability.

Headnote:(A) Public Trust Doctrine - Obligation of the State to protect water bodies - It is the paramount duty of the State not only to protect ponds, lakes, and water bodies but also to ensure that those illegally filled in are restored - This constitutes a constitutional duty of the State to maintain natural resources for public benefit. (Para 3)

(B) Revenue Records - Rectification and verification - Administrative authorities are required to reconcile ground conditions with historical revenue status and ensure that discrepancies are rectified through appropriate legal channels to protect public resource entries. (Paras 6, 7)

(C) Prevention of Encroachment - Removing illegal occupation - The State must take proactive measures to identify, initiate eviction proceedings, and clear illegal constructions and waste dumping within designated water bodies, ensuring their restoration to their original ecological capacity. (Paras 7, 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner alleged the degradation and disappearance of natural water bodies due to illegal land filling, construction, and disposal of solid waste. The court directed the formation of a departmental committee to conduct a physical verification of the disputed sites, compare these findings against historical land records, and determine the extent of illegal occupation.

Findings of Court:
The inspection identified significant discrepancies where lands historically designated as water bodies were occupied by unauthorized settlers or used for infrastructure. The court accepted the departmental undertaking to investigate these discrepancies, initiate eviction proceedings against encroachers, and restore the land to its primary function as water storage through systematic administrative action.

Issues: The central issues were the determination of the factual existence of water bodies versus their current land-use status and the mandatory obligation of the government to initiate restoration and eviction proceedings for encroached land.

Ratio Decidendi: The State maintains an affirmative constitutional responsibility to preserve natural resources. Consequently, where water bodies are found to be encroached upon or misused, the administrative machinery is mandated to correct revenue discrepancies and perform time-bound restoration, ensuring that public land is liberated from illegal occupation.

Result: Appeal disposed of with binding directions for State compliance and ongoing monitoring by the relevant tribunal.

1. The appellant before us had filed an Original Application being O.A. No. 589 of 2019 before the National Green Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') alleging encroachment of certain lakes in Nagina Tehsil of Bijnor district. The Original Application having been disposed of by order dated 18.10.2019, the present Civil Appeal has been instituted.

2. During the pendency of the Civil Appeal, this Court by its order dated 16.07.2024 issued the following direction:-

"1. The issue raised by the appellant before the National Green Tribunal (for short, “the NGT”) was of immense importance. Only by way of an illustration, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant pointed out certain instances of ponds/lakes/water bodies being filled in by garbage and other material. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant also pointed out that after filling in the ponds/lakes/water bodies, illegal constructions have been made. The NGT called for a report. A copy of the report was not furnished to the appellant who was the applicant before the NGT. The impugned order, which is very short, indicates that at least in the case of one pond, such allegation was found to be correct and, therefore, the NGT has recorded that a portion of the garbage dumped in the pond has been removed. In our view, NGT ought to have kept the application pending.

2. We direct the Secretary of the Ministry of Environment of the State of Uttar Pradesh to constitute a Committee of senior officials including the officials of the Revenue Department, Environment Department and the State Pollution Control Board. The said Committee shall be constituted within a period of three weeks from today. To begin with, the Committee will deal with the grievances made by the appellant about the ponds/lakes/water bodies in Tehsil Nagina, District Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh. The State Government shall ensure that the inspection of the entire revenue record relating to the properties which are mentioned in paragraph 4 of the application made by the appellant is provided to the Committee. After examining the old revenue records, the Committee will ascertain whether there were any entries regarding existence of the ponds/lakes/water bodies. The Committee constituted by the Secretary of the Ministry of Environment shall make a visit to the properties on which ponds/lakes/water bodies were in existence. In addition, the Committee will visit the lands described in paragraph 4 of the application filed before the NGT. The Committee will make in-depth study on the allegation of disappearance of ponds/lakes/water bodies in Tehsil Nagina. The Committee will suggest measures for the restoration thereof. Subsequently, the scope of the work of the Committee can be expanded to cover many districts.

3. We must record here with a great deal of emphasis that it is the paramount duty of the State not only to protect the ponds/lakes/water bodies in the State but also to ensure that ponds/lakes/water bodies, which have been illegally filled in, are restored. It is the Constitutional duty of the State to do so. The Committee appointed by the Secretary, Ministry of Environment, will make a note of this obligation on the part of the State.

4. Copies of the reports of the Committee shall be submitted to this Court through the State of Uttar Pradesh. The first report shall be submitted by the Committee to this Court on or before 15th November, 2024.

5. An advance notice shall be given by the Committee to the appellant of the time and date fixed for inspection to enable the appellant to remain present at the concerned site. We make it clear that we are granting permission only to the appellant to remain present at the time of inspection and the appellant will ensure that no other person accompanies him at the time of inspection.

6. For consideration of the report, list the Appeal on 22nd November, 2024 under the caption of ‘Directions’."

3. In compliance with the directions, the report has been filed on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 133

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHAMIRZA ABID BEG – AppellantVersusSTATE OF U.P. – Respondent447292019

Cases Referred (1)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
MIRZA ABID BEG – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. – Respondent
447292019