SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 2280

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, Judicial Member, Arun Kumar Verma, Expert Member
Nirmal Kumar Singha – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
Original Application No.91/2023/EZ



Advocates:
For the Applicant(s): Saheb Banerjee
For the Respondent(s): Sibojyoti Chakrabarti

Felling permission for trees not listed in Schedule of West Bengal Trees Act, 2006, such as Eucalyptus and Akashmoni, is valid without mandatory prior approval, as confirmed by exemption notification incentivizing plantations.

Headnote:(A) West Bengal Trees (Protection & Conservation in Non-Forest Areas) Act, 2006 - Sections 3(a), 5(1), 21 and Schedule - Permission for felling trees - Trees not listed in Schedule, including certain species like Eucalyptus and Akashmoni, do not require mandatory prior permission - Notification dated 13.02.2008 exempting such trees from security deposit to incentivize plantations under social and farm forestry schemes - Permit issued by competent authority for felling such trees held legal and valid, not liable to be quashed. (Paras 30, 31, 32, 34)

(B) Environmental Law - Land acquisition for public purpose - Trees on acquired land valued by forest authorities - Felling pursuant to valid permit during pendency of partition suit and police investigation into alleged forgery - No violation where trees felled belong to exempted category. (Paras 9-15, 22, 35)

Facts of the case:
Applicant, claiming to have planted trees on disputed plot later acquired for bridge construction, alleged illegal felling of 938 trees based on forged affidavit and invalid permission. Police registered FIR for criminal trespass and mischief; investigation ongoing including document forgery probe. Land acquisition authority withheld compensation pending civil title suit. Forest authorities granted felling permit for 752 Eucalyptus and 219 Akashmoni trees after enquiry, later noting non-compliance with compensatory plantation.

Findings of Court:
Permit for felling exempted tree species was legal; no merit in challenge to permission or broader reliefs sought like abolishing authorities or restraining tree cutting.

Issues: Validity of felling permission for trees not requiring mandatory approval under the Act; impact of alleged forgery on permit; compliance with compensatory afforestation.

Ratio Decidendi: Trees outside the Act's Schedule do not need prior permission; exemption notification for specified species validly incentivizes plantations - permit compliant with procedure, hence unassailable despite ancillary disputes.

Result: Original Application dismissed. No order as to costs. (Para 35)

Table of Content
1. applicant's grievances on illegal tree felling (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. police investigation into tree cutting complaint (Para 8 , 16 , 19 , 20)
3. land acquisition and tree valuation for highway (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. forest department permissions and compliance issues (Para 17 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
5. pending high court writ petition (Para 23 , 24)
6. eucalyptus/akashmoni exempt from felling restrictions (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
7. application dismissed, no merit found (Para 35 , 36 , 37)

ORDER

1. The Applicant in the present Original Application is aggrieved by the illegal cutting of about 938 trees in the district Bankura. His case is that he had planted 1100 trees on plot No.815, Mouza – Kapila, JL. No.105, Police Station – Gangajalghati, District –Bankura and out of these 1100 trees, 938 trees have survived and are growing due to the care taken by the Applicant.

2. The relief claimed in the present Original Application reads as under:-

i) The application/petition be allowed as above with all reliefs.

ii) That the said act is enacted by the legislature for special purpose of curbing illegal axing of trees within rural areas, therefore the acts of the respondents itself without the very purpose of the act and therefore direction be given to respondents shall be followed scrupulously and that the existing tree authority shall be abolished, turned down and all its operations shall be restricted till formation of new tree authority as per provisions of Indian Forest Act, 1927;

iii) Permission granted by the Forest Ranger be quashed and set aside and be held as null and void;

iv) The Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to call all records and proceeding of tree and details with quantitative date for last five years.

v) The respondents be perpetually restrained from taking decision to cut old and new trees in Bankura District and further perpetually restrained from causing harm to birds nest and trees on the said District.

vi) It is humbly prayed to this Hon’ble Tribunal to appoint court commissioner to verify the factual position of the spot and to file his report before this Hon’ble Tribunal.

vii) It is humbly prayed to this Hon’ble Tribunal that, if respondents or any citizen wants to cut any trees within the jurisdiction of respondents, they must inform to this Hon’ble Tribunal by filing affidavit for necessary permission.

viii) That the application of the applicant may kindly be decreed with costs.

ix) That any necessary amendment in application kindly may allow.

x) Any just, equitable order in the interest of environment and justice may be passed.

3. It is further stated that the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) decided to build a bridge over River Shali and issued notice for acceptance of compensation to the Applicant. The applicant is stated to have filed his objections in writing before the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bankura during hearing on 12.08.2022, but it is stated that the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bankura declined to accept the same.

4. It is further alleged that the Forest Beat Officer, Gangajalghati Range, inspected the land in question and has given his sanction for cutting of the 938 trees.

5. It is also alleged that one Santi Sutradhar, Respondent No.10 herein, who is a wood merchant, has manufactured false and unfilled documents on which sanction has been granted by the Forest Ranger ignoring the provisions of the Indian Forest Act.

6. It is also stated that the Government has issued notice for acquisition of the land and valuation of the trees has also been determined by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.

7. The Applicant is also stated to have filed a complaint before the Gangajalghati Police Station on 19.06.2023, Annexure-C to the Original Application, on which direction has been given to the Assistant Sub Inspector to investigate the matter.

8. The Inspector-In-Charge, Gangajalghati Police Station, Bankura has filed affida

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top