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

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 3522

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
REENU PAUL – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings SL.

Date or directions and COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS No Registrar’s order with Signatures WPPIL No. 37 of 2025 Hon’ble G. Narendar, C.J.

Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Abhijay Negi and Ms. Snigdha Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Addl. C.S.C.

Standing Counsel for the State.

3. Mr. Naresh Pant, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.

4. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for NHAI, learned Standing Counsel for Union of India, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State of Uttarakhand and the intervenor, in person, Shri Jairaaj and Shri Ashish Garg.

6. The Director, NHAI is also present virtually.

7. Shri Jairaaj (Former HoFF, Uttarakhand Forest Department) places certain photographs and submits that he had travelled to Sahastradhara Road, where certain trees have been transplanted earlier, and on an assurance made to this Court, that the survival rate of the transplanted trees is hundred percent, the same was permitted by this Court; and that presently, all the trees are dead and gone and not a single tree, that was tra

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top