Supreme Court Freezes Construction Along Yamuna in Vrindavan, Warns of River Channel Shrinkage

A Division Bench of Justices Pardiwala and Viswanathan halts construction near Vrindavan and threatens to summon Chief Secretaries over Yamuna encroachment non-compliance.

The Supreme Court on 21 July 2026 imposed a status quo on all construction activity near the Yamuna river in Vrindavan, District Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, after being apprised through interlocutory applications that ongoing construction was likely to shrink the river channel. A Division Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan, hearing Ashok Kumar Sinha v. Union of India & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 3367/2020), found the situation “very serious” and said its primary concern was to ensure that the ecological flow of water in the Yamuna is maintained. The Court simultaneously issued a last-opportunity warning to multiple States to supply information on Yamuna encroachments, and gave the State of Bihar six weeks to remove all unauthorised structures between Nauzar Ghat and Nurpur Ghat in Patna.

The Interlocutory Applications and What They Raised

Two interlocutory applications — I.A. No. 123901/2026 and I.A. No. 123904/2026 — were placed before the Court at the 21 July 2026 hearing. Both applications were allowed. The Court issued notice on them, returnable on 23 September 2026, with dasti service permitted in addition to regular service.

The applications brought to the Court's attention construction activity along the Yamuna in Vrindavan that, according to what was placed on record, would ultimately cause the river channel to shrink. The Court directed that a comprehensive report addressing what had been stated in the applications must be placed on record by the next date of hearing.

Mr. Rohit K. Singh, counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh, waived service of notice on the State's behalf. The Court's direction for status quo means no further construction may be undertaken in the affected area until the matter is next heard on 23 September 2026.

States Warned: Furnish Information or Face Chief Secretary Summons

This civil appeal has a longer history of the Court seeking information from multiple States about Yamuna encroachments. By an order dated 12 March 2026, the Court had formulated five questions in paragraph 23 and requested Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Additional Solicitor General, to file a comprehensive detailed report answering those questions. That request was repeated in the order dated 23 April 2026, where the A.S.G. sought additional time and the matter was posted as part-heard to 21 July 2026.

On 21 July 2026, Ms. Bhati again sought more time, informing the Court that some States had furnished information but not to her satisfaction, while others had yet to respond at all. The Court's patience on this point appears to have run out. It described what would follow if the States failed: the Court said it “shall be compelled to summon the Chief Secretary of each of those States before this Court.”

In addition, the Court expanded the list of States from whom information is required. Two States — Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh — were added to the earlier list of nine States. All States on the expanded list are required to furnish the necessary information to the Union at the earliest.

Bihar: Six Weeks to Clear Encroachments Between Nauzar Ghat and Nurpur Ghat

The stretch of the Yamuna between Nauzar Ghat and Nurpur Ghat in Patna had been specifically identified in the Court's order of 12 March 2026. At that stage, the Court had noted that out of 213 encroachments, 58 had been demolished, while 145 remained. The State had explained the balance was on account of interim orders passed by the High Court and courts of the district judiciary.

By 21 July 2026, the Court was informed that no steps had been taken to remove the remaining encroachments since the March order. The Court granted six weeks to the State of Bihar to ensure that every unauthorised structure, construction, and encroachment between Nauzar Ghat and Nurpur Ghat is removed.

A compliance report by way of an affidavit from a competent authority is required by the next date of hearing. The Court said any laxity will be viewed strictly. Ms. Rebecca Mishra, counsel for Bihar, was present and was requested by the Court to convey the order to the concerned authority that day itself.

Court's Position on Conflicting Lower Court Orders

A recurring issue in this matter has been that interim orders from the High Court and district courts have been cited by State authorities as reasons for non-removal of encroachments. The Court addressed this directly in its 21 July 2026 order: irrespective of any order that may be in operation from any other court, the Supreme Court's directions shall be fully complied with.

This position effectively subordinates any conflicting lower court interim order to the Supreme Court's directions in this civil appeal, leaving the States without that procedural shield going forward.

Order

The Court on 21 July 2026 in Civil Appeal No. 3367/2020 passed the following directions:

• I.A. Nos. 123901/2026 and 123904/2026 are allowed; notice issued returnable on 23 September 2026; dasti service permitted.
• Status quo directed — no further construction along the Yamuna in Vrindavan, District Mathura, until the next date of hearing.
• A comprehensive report on the contents of the interlocutory applications is to be filed by 23 September 2026.
• All States on the Court's list (now expanded to include Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, in addition to the earlier nine) are directed to furnish information to the Union at the earliest; failure will result in the Court summoning the Chief Secretary of the defaulting State.
• The State of Bihar is given six weeks to remove all unauthorised structures and encroachments between Nauzar Ghat and Nurpur Ghat in Patna, with a compliance affidavit from a competent authority to be filed by 23 September 2026.
• The Court's directions shall prevail over any interim orders of other courts on the subject of encroachment removal.