'Sukhna ko aur kitna sukhaoge': SC raps officials, builder mafias for destroying Chandigarh lake

Sukhna lake

The Supreme Court on Wednesday strongly criticised government officials and builder mafias for destroying Chandigarh’s iconic Sukhna Lake through illegal construction and administrative connivance.

Hearing the Aravalli Hills case, a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant warned the Haryana government against repeating past mistakes that have contributed to environmental damage in the region.

“Kitna sukhaoge Sukhna Lake ko (How much will you dry up Sukhna Lake)? Due to connivance of state officials, the builder mafia is operating… You have damaged the lake completely," the bench said, as reported by India Today.

The rain-fed Sukhna Lake, one of Chandigarh’s most prominent tourist attractions, has been struggling with declining water levels for years.

Once known for its scenic appeal, the lake has steadily lost its charm as unchecked construction and ecological neglect have taken a toll.

The top court previously questioned why all forest and lake issues are bypassing the high courts to reach the apex court, especially through interim applications in a 1995 PIL.

A bench led by Chief Justice Kant and Justice Bagchi initially asked why these matters are all coming before this court. Regarding an application related to the Sukhna Lake case, the CJI remarked that it appeared a friendly match was underway, possibly prompted by some private developers and others.

The bench asked Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the Centre, and senior lawyer K Parmeswar, acting as amicus curiae in the forest case, to inform it of local issues that the high courts could address themselves.

Litigation over Chandigarh's Sukhna Lake mainly involves the high court's efforts to protect its catchment area from encroachment, including demolition orders in 2020 in the protected zone.

The Supreme Court made pointed comments while hearing a case concerning the new definition of the Aravalli range. In response to significant public outcry regarding this new definition, the court suspended its previous order from last year and established an expert committee (CEC) to conduct a thorough examination of the matter.