The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a stern directive to the government of Punjab, urging an immediate reconsideration of the recently enacted Punjab Protection of Trees Act. The Division Bench, led by Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor, expressed deep concern regarding the legislative framework, characterizing it as inherently draconian during a session held on October 31, 2026. The Court warned that the current provisions, which facilitate the widespread removal of trees through a simplified permission-based system, could result in irreparable environmental damage to the state.

The judicial intervention originated during a hearing in the matter of Praneet Kaur v. State of Punjab and Others , a case that has become the focal point for ongoing litigation regarding environmental governance. The Bench pointedly observed that the new legislation appears to prioritize administrative convenience and revenue generation over the substantive protection of the environment. Under the challenged statute, the requirement for authorization to fell trees has been streamlined to a process of application and payment, which the Court suggested essentially equates to "deemed permission."

Legislative Safeguards Facing Judicial Scrutiny

The High Court’s frustration stems from the perception that the new law effectively dismantles established environmental safeguards. During the hearing, the Bench noted that felling trees should be treated with the utmost seriousness, yet the current legislative language permits such actions subject primarily to the payment of money. The Court emphasized that it stands prepared to examine the legal merits of the statute, signaling that it would not hesitate to intervene if the legislation is found to be contrary to the public interest.

"Every State, every government also wants the protection of environment and felling of trees is something which has to be viewed with a lot more seriousness," the Bench remarked during the proceedings. "Your provision, unfortunately, only says that 'you apply for permission, permission granted, deemed permission . At the most, money pay.' This will be destroying your State."

The Court highlighted that the state’s executive officers of local urban bodies have been designated as tree protection officers under the new law. This arrangement has drawn scrutiny because these same municipal bodies are often the entities seeking permission to clear vegetation for infrastructure projects, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest within the implementation of the law. The Bench was clear in its assessment that the current structure could lead to a systemic failure in environmental oversight.

Fragmented Forest Cover Drives Urgent Intervention

The urgency of the High Court's stance is underpinned by the deteriorating ecological status of the region. Data referenced by the Court, derived from the India State of Forest Report 2023, paints a concerning picture of the states' natural landscape. Punjab’s recorded tree and forest cover stands at a mere 3.67%, while neighboring Haryana is similarly situated at 3.65%. These figures are significantly lower than the national average of 25.17% and fall far short of the 33% benchmark established by the National Forest Policy of 1988.

The ongoing judicial oversight began in December 2025, when a batch of public interest litigations was filed to challenge the proposed removal of 251 trees in Mohali district. At that time, the Court had instituted a strict interim order prohibiting the felling of trees anywhere in Punjab without express judicial approval. The Court noted that it had actually prepared a set of comprehensive guidelines for environmental authorities prior to the enactment of the new legislation in September, but the introduction of the statute effectively stalled the implementation of these directives. By urging the state to take a fresh look at the law, the Court is providing a pathway for the government to align its policy with broader environmental mandates before the judiciary conducts a formal review of the Act's constitutionality.

Governmental Response and Procedural Deadlines

In response to the sharp judicial criticism, the counsel representing the State of Punjab requested additional time to consult with government officials and obtain formal instructions. The Court granted this request, listing the matter for a further hearing on Monday, November 2, 2026. This deadline is expected to be critical, as the administration must now determine whether to amend the Act or defend its provisions against the Court's pointed observations regarding its potential for environmental destruction.

The proceedings have also had a cross-border impact on legislative processes. The government of Haryana, which had drafted a proposed tree protection law modeled heavily upon the Punjab statute, has informed the Court of its intent to reconsider its approach. Officials in Haryana have assured the Bench that the finalization of their draft legislation will be deferred until the Court’s specific concerns and emerging guidelines regarding tree protection have been thoroughly examined and integrated.

As the matter moves forward, the primary question remains whether the state will prioritize the rigid application of a fee-based tree felling policy or adopt a framework based on rigorous ecological assessment. The High Court has signaled that the current mechanism of "deemed permission" is unlikely to withstand strict judicial scrutiny. The upcoming responses from both the Punjab and Haryana governments are expected to clarify the trajectory of environmental policy in the region and determine if the judiciary will proceed with a full-scale examination of the legislation's legality. For now, the Court’s oral remarks have placed an immediate check on the implementation of the new statute, forcing a pause in the administrative procedures that previously allowed for the accelerated clearing of vegetation across the state.