IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Najmi Waziri, J.
Neeraj Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Vinay Sheel Saxena & Ors. - Respondents
Cont.Cas(C) 851 of 2021 and CM Appl. 8253 of 2022
Decided On : 28-04-2022
ORDER - Environmental Conservation - The court issued directives to the concerned authorities to provide affidavits, conduct video-graphing, and consider transplantation of trees before granting permission for cutting them down. The court emphasized the importance of preserving fully grown trees and the adverse environmental impact of their denudation.
Fact of the Case:
The court issued directives to the concerned authorities regarding the preservation and transplantation of trees, and ordered the presence of the Tree Officer in court on the next date.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there is a worrying issue of trees being cut down in Delhi under official sanction, and emphasized the need to arrest this self-defeating exercise by the Forest Department. The court also appointed a Senior Advocate as Amicus Curiae and emphasized the importance of preserving fully grown trees for environmental redemption.
Issues: Preservation of fully grown trees, transplantation of trees, cutting down of trees under official sanction, and the role of the Tree Officer in granting permission for tree cutting.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of preserving fully grown trees, directed the authorities to provide affidavits and conduct video-graphing, and ordered the presence of the Tree Officer in court to consider transplantation of trees before granting permission for cutting them down.
Final Decision: The court issued directives to the concerned authorities, appointed a Senior Advocate as Amicus Curiae, and ordered the presence of the Tree Officer in court on the next date.
ORDER
The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
1. The learned Senior Advocate for R-1 to R-3 refers to remedial measures taken by R-1 to R-3. This issue shall be considered on the next date, when arguments on the contempt notice will be heard.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the court's attention to an affidavit filed by the Engineer-in-Chief, PWD on 17.05.2013, before the NGT, wherein the said officer had undertaken on behalf of the PWD that the 46 roads (listed in the annexure to the affidavit) will be promptly re-visited and the 3279 trees noted therein will be de- concretized. Let an affidavit be filed by Engineer-in-Chief, PWD showing that the said 84 trees on Vikas Marg (Road No. 75A & 75B) have been de-concretised. The entire stretch of road shall be video graphed and a copy of the same shall be filed along with the compliance affidavit within two weeks.
3. Mr. Prasad further submits that a tree is cut down every hour in Delhi under official sanction. This is a worrying issue because on the one side endeavour is said to be underway to maintain and augment the green cover of Delhi while simultaneously fully grown trees are allowed to be cut down. This self-defeating exercise by the Forest Department, GNCTD needs to be arrested at the earliest.
4. It will be logical and prudent to transplant fully grown trees instead of cutting them down. Let the department of Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) file an affidavit detailing:
i) the number of permitted trees to be cut down in the last three years, month-wise and zone-wise;
ii) how many trees were transplanted, if any,
iii) how many compensatory afforestation have been completed and the status of each compensatory afforestation with photographs.
5. The action to be taken by the Forest Department and/or the Tree Officer apropos the cutting down of each tree finds direction in the order passed in W.P(C) 827/2015 on 25.05.2015. Let an affidavit be filed in this regard within ten working days.
6. Looking at the nature of this case this court appoints Mr. N. Hariharan, learned Senior Advocate as Amicus Curiae. A copy of the petition be supplied to him in the course of the day.
7. The previous order shows that the Tree Officer has permitted a fully- grown tree to be cut down. It was possibly about 25-30 years age having a girth of roughly 200 cms. It was abutting the road and a private land as seen in the photographs. For some reason, the Tree Officer chose not to see reason in retaining the fully-grown tree, which had been a part of the neighbourhood for decades and added to the ambience and the environment. He has permitted the cutting down of the tree. The Tree Officer will explain whether he inspected the site and assessed the tree before granting permission to cut it. It has to be borne in mind that permission is sought under the Delhi Tree Preservation Act, in which 'preservation' of trees is the primary objective. The Tree Officer is repository of public faith and trust, that trees which form an essential part of people's lives are not allowed to be cut needlessly or wantonly. The statutory duty cast upon the Tree Officer necessarily requires assessment of the necessity to cut a tree for the project for which the permission is sought. A site visit would be prudent. The shortage of Tree-Officers, necessary support staff, cannot be an excuse for granting permission for cutting down trees in the city. The adverse environmental impact of such denudation is all too well-known. Compensatory afforestation if at all carried out, on the fringes of the city, far-removed from the congested areas of human habitation, where the sole decades-old-tree once stood as a carbon-sump-cum-fresh oxygen generator-cum-shade provider-cum- visual respite from the ever increasing concretization; the geographically distant and nascent compensatory plantation can hardly be of any respite or actual compensation. In any case, it will take decad
AI
Preservation of fully grown trees and the adverse environmental impact of their denudation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Guidelines for Pruning of Trees, framed under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Rules, 1996, were in conflict with the DPT Act, and were set....
Court emphasized that tree felling may occur if transplantation is feasible, reiterating environmental safeguards necessity while permitting DDA's project.
Procedural fairness is essential in the enforcement of environmental laws; parties must be afforded adequate opportunity to present their case in compelling decisions.
Administrative notifications cannot override or nullify a previously binding court judgment that has attained finality.
Environmental compensation under 'Polluter Pays' is distinct from forest/tree felling penalties and mandatory for ecological damage from illegal tree removal on any land; assessed by pollution regula....
Illegal tree felling violating permission conditions and non-compensatory plantation attracts Polluter Pays; interim compensation imposed; formula approved for DPCC/SPCBs computation based on tree fa....
The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with its orders regarding environmental protection, holding the DDA in contempt for unauthorized tree felling and failure to disclose material facts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.