IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.36438 of 2023

Dr. Mamata Sukla and others …. Petitioners

Dr. Mamata Sukla, in-person

Mr. Prafulla Kumar Rath, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae)

assisted by Mr. Sudarsan Nanda, Advocate

and Mr. S. Mohapatra, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties

Mr. Sanjay Rath, Addl. Govt. Advocate

CORAM:

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No. 07.01.2026

07. 1. An affidavit filed by the State is taken on record. On the

last occasion, this Court had directed the State Government to disclose whether any exercise of identifying the trees, which have medicinal values or the trees which are merely deadwood before felling of the trees has been undertaken or not. We further called upon the State to highlight whether any clearance from the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) is obtained before the trees are uprooted in the garb of town planning,

urbanization and/or implementation of any project across the State.

2. According to Mr. Prafulla Kumar Rath, learned Senior Counsel appearing as Amicus Curiae, the affidavit filed by the State is silent in this regard, however, a stand is taken by the State that the permission of the said authority is required in case any tree grown within the forest area is uprooted and/or felled therefrom and not in case of the trees standing in other areas.

3. The copy of the said affidavit has been circulated amongst the petitioners as well as learned Amicus Curiae and we expect that the petitioners and learned Amicus Curiae will respond on the averments made therein on the next date, when the matter would be listed.

4. In course of the hearing, the petitioners raise a serious concern on indiscriminate felling of the trees which ranges between 1000 and 1500 per day. Such rampant felling of the trees definitely causes an imbalance in an ecological system and has not only impact on the air pollution but also on the survival of the creatures on earth. 5. The petitioners vociferously submit that such indiscriminate felling of the trees is happening in Bamra Forest Division and Bargarh Forest Division. If such stand is taken to be correct, felling of the trees in the forest divisions requires an immediate permission from the authority so constituted and the State has to clarify such stand. The petitioners submit that such incident is widely circulated and reported at the Media which cannot be said to be false and/or incorrect.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, which appears to us very serious in nature, we take into consideration the same, subject however, the petitioner filing an affidavit affirming those facts and the supporting documents in relation thereto on or before the next date of listing. The petitioners have assured this Court to file an affidavit on the next date.

7. In view of the fact that even a rampant felling of trees is happening within the forest division area, there is no iota of evidence forthcoming before this Court that the study and the report has been conducted and filed nor the permission from the said authority being obtained. We, therefore, feel it prudent not only to protect the environment but also the creatures on earth in restraining the State from felling any tree in those forest divisions till the next date of listing. Equally, we permit the State to come up in the form of an affidavit as to whether the allegation of uprooting the trees from the aforementioned forest divisions is factually correct or not and, in the event, the same is found to have the slightest semblance of truth, it would also disclose whether all the paraphernalia and the statutory formalities were undertaken.

8. It is pertinent to record that Mr. Rath, learned Amicus Curiae has submitted a compilation and an extensive suggestion and also the measures to be ensured before any decision of felling of the trees is taken which is also taken on record. A copy of the same has been served upon Mr. Sanjay Rath,