Mussoorie Forest Scam: HC Notices Expose a Crisis of Governance
Mussoorie forest scam was first reported by The Probe in Sep. The HC has stepped in, but the issue goes beyond missing pillars—it reveals a deeper governance crisis.
Mussoorie Forest Scam Is Not a Lapse—It’s a Governance Collapse
On September 20, 2025, The Probe first reported on the disappearance of thousands of forest boundary pillars from the Mussoorie Forest Division, exposing a silent but sweeping erosion of forest safeguards in Uttarakhand. The scale of the problem emerged during the revision of the division’s Working Plan, which revealed that 7,375 of the 12,321 officially installed boundary pillars—nearly 60 per cent—had vanished, with the heaviest losses concentrated in the Mussoorie and Raipur ranges, areas most vulnerable to encroachment and most attractive to hotels, resorts, and real estate interests. The Uttarakhand High Court had recently stepped in and issued notices in the matter, but the Mussoorie forest scandal is not merely about missing stone markers—it is about a collapse of governance that allowed forest land to be quietly erased from the map, —a failure this report examines in detail.
Also Read: Mussoorie Forest Scam: Boundary Pillars Vanish, Mafia Gains Ground
Forest boundary pillars are not ornamental stones scattered along a map’s edge; they are the legal spine of forest protection. Installed by the Forest Department and individually numbered, these markers fix the precise limits of forest land on the ground, linking physical territory to official records. Their presence prevents boundary disputes, deters illegal occupation, and anchors enforcement action when violations occur. Once these markers disappear, forest land effectively slips into a grey zone—difficult to defend, easier to occupy, and vulnerable to quiet conversion into private property.
In December 2025, alarmed by the scale of this breakdown, a Public Interest Litigation was filed by Naresh Chaudhary, a resident of Delhi, asking the Uttarakhand High Court to intervene in what he termed one of the State’s gravest admitted failures of forest governance: the disappearance of 7,375 officially recorded boundary pillars from the Mussoorie Forest Division.
This is not a story of unverified claims or unsubstantiated rumours. The disappearance of thousands of boundary pillars has been officially documented and rigorously confirmed. A month-long field verification by forest staff physically checked pillar locations, while the findings underwent scrutiny at multiple levels within the Forest Department’s Working Plan Wing. The results were then formally endorsed by the Standing Consultative Committee, the apex statutory body responsible for overseeing forest management under the Working Plan Code, ensuring that the verification was not a routine exercise but a process sanctioned at the highest level.
Further, the review received approval from senior forest officers and expert institutions, including the Forest Research Institute and the Forest Survey of India. In essence, the State itself acknowledged the facts, making any attempt to dismiss the issue legally and administratively untenable. Once such findings are officially accepted, the law obliges the government to initiate criminal proceedings, hold responsible officials accountable, and restore the affected forest lands.
But this is not what happened. Instead of registering criminal cases and bringing the perpetrators to justice, the State chose to appoint a junior Conservator-rank officer to “reinvestigate” the matter. The petitioner states that this decision is legally questionable and deeply troubling. A junior officer is not empowered to re-examine facts that have already been verified and approved by the apex statutory committee, nor can such an officer investigate allegations of corruption, conspiracy, or sudden wealth accumulation among senior officials.
Also Read: Uttarakhand Eco Tourism Scam: Report Alleges Loot, State Looks Away
Moreover, the petitioner points out that the original report contained no defects or discrepancies that would justify a repeat exercise. In the view of the petitioner, this so-called “reinvestigation” appears to be a calculated manoeuvre to delay accountability, shield higher-level officials, and ensure that the inquiry remains superficial, leaving the most serious questions of responsibility unanswered. By sidelining proper legal and investigative mechanisms, the State has turned what should have been a decisive corrective action into a procedural charade.
Mussoorie Forest Scam: Uttarakhand High Court Sends Notices, Next Hearing on Feb 11
At this backdrop, the PIL before the Uttarakhand High Court assumes extraordinary significance. It highlights a systemic failure in forest governance and seeks judicial intervention where the State machinery has repeatedly faltered. The litigation requests a CBI probe into the disappearance of the forest boundary pillars, the widespread illegal encroachments, and the suspicious accumulation of assets by forest officials.
It calls for a scientific, geo-referenced survey by the Survey of India to accurately demarcate forest lands and permanently restore missing boundaries. Additionally, the High Court is asked to direct the implementation of a restoration and reclamation plan to remove encroachments, reinstall boundary markers, and quantify and recover ecological losses. The PIL also emphasises the need for digitisation and formal demarcation of all forest areas, including Civil Soyam and deemed forests, the transfer of lands currently held by Revenue authorities to the Forest Department, and the fixing of personal accountability for officers who failed to protect these ecologically sensitive areas.
The Uttarakhand High Court addressed the missing forest boundary pillar issue with urgency during its hearing on 24 December 2025. The Bench issued formal notices to the CBI, the Union of India, the State Forest Department, the Survey of India, and the Supreme Court’s Central Empowered Committee, requiring all parties to submit written responses. While the Court did not yet order a CBI investigation or pass any interim protection measures, it expressed serious concern over the scale of the missing pillars and the potential ecological fallout, describing the situation as “very serious” and emphasising the need for accountability from both the Centre and the State. The respondents have been directed to file counter-affidavits within six weeks, with the next hearing scheduled for 11 February 2026, when the Court will examine the replies and determine further steps.
Also Read: Uttarakhand Eco Tourism Scam | The Probe Impact: Govt Transfers Bhargav
The officer who first blew the whistle on the disappearance of forest boundary pillars in the Mussoorie Forest Division is Sanjiv Chaturvedi, an IFS officer widely recognised for exposing corruption across multiple states. On 21 June 2025, Chaturvedi formally wrote to the Head of Forest Force urging the constitution of a Special Investigation Team or a CBI-supervised, court-monitored probe, warning that such a massive loss of forest markers could not have occurred without the collusion of field staff and the protection of political interests. Despite the seriousness of the warning, the State took no action, prompting a follow-up letter on 20 August 2025, in which he flagged efforts to shield officials and sought complete scrutiny of the assets of forest officers posted in the affected areas. This inaction is especially striking given Chaturvedi’s record: after exposing the Uttarakhand eco-tourism scam, he was abruptly transferred out of his operational role—within days of his findings becoming public—to a non-field posting as Director of the Forestry Training Academy in Haldwani, effectively removing him from frontline forest governance.
The Mussoorie case has moved far beyond missing boundary pillars; it now exposes how the State responds to large-scale illegality. When accountability is postponed, and scrutiny is deflected, the failure ceases to be administrative and becomes structural. What is unfolding in Uttarakhand is not an isolated forest scam, but a troubling signal of how power responds when confronted with inconvenient truth.
