Read Time: 08 minutes
The court emphasised that a combined reading of Article 21, Article 51A(g), and Article 48A of the Constitution of India places an obligation on the states to safeguard the environment."Trees are a very important part of our environment. The precautionary principle wants the government to ensure that they act against the violators."
While directing the Tree Authority to conduct a tree census, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that any permission for felling 50 or more trees must receive approval from the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) before being implemented.
A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih noted the failure of all concerned authorities to effectively implement the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994. It said, "It is necessary that the work of granting permission is supervised. We, therefore, direct that whenever permission is granted by the Tree Officer for felling 50 or more trees, the said permission shall not be acted upon unless the same is approved by the CEC."
The court clarified that whenever such permission is granted the tree officer must immediately forward all related documents to the CEC. Upon receiving the documents, the CEC may, at its discretion, request additional documentation from the tree officer. The CEC will then review the application, consider all relevant aspects, and decide whether to grant permission or not.
Emphasising that permission to fell 50 or more trees should only be granted in exceptional cases, the court said that the CEC shall have the authority to reject the application, partially approve it, or modify the reasons for permission provided by the Tree Officer.
"...We direct Tree Officers to ensure that a decision on the application is taken within 60 days as provided in Section 9(3). We also direct that as soon as an application is received under Section 9, copies of the application should be immediately given to the CEC by the Tree Officer...," it added.
While considering the matter of the tree census, the court highlighted the importance of the census for knowing the existing trees and directed the Tree Authority to immediately undertake the census in terms of Section 7(b) of the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act 1994. The court said the Tree Authority shall appoint the Forest Research Institute (FRI) as an authority to carry out the census.
In view of this, the court appointed three experts to assist the Tree Authority as well as FRI:
Furthermore, the court reiterated that the basic function of the Tree Authority is to preserve and save trees, noting that trees can only be felled under exceptional circumstances. The court said the tree officer must apply their mind, visit the site where trees are to be felled, and assess whether it is truly necessary or not.
Recently, Supreme Court had directed the Forest Department to take action as per the recommendations of the CEC in a case concerning tree felling in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ).
A bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Manmohan, while issuing notice to one Shiv Shankar Agarwal,We have perused the conclusions and recommendations of the CEC. In terms of the recommendations, the Forest Department shall take action as per the provisions in clauses (b), (c), (f), and (g) of paragraph 14 of the recommendations. We direct the Forest Department to close the path referred to therein."
In the last hearing, the Supreme Court had issued notice to Uttar Pradesh officials calling upon them to show cause as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them in a case concerning tree felling in the Taj Trapezium Zone. (TTZ)
"We are of the view that the persons mentioned in paragraph 8 are guilty of civil contempt. Hence, we issue notice to them returnable on 19th December calling upon them to show cause as to why action under contempt of court act should not be taken against them, " Justice Oka led bench said, while also adding that the report discloses a 'shocking state of affairs', recording that 454 trees were illegally felled on the 18th and 19th of September 2024.
On 23 November, the Supreme Court came down heavily on the Delhi Tree Authority (DTA) for its failure to conduct a tree census in the capital, as required under the Delhi Tree Preservation Act (DTPA).
Case Title: MC Mehta vs UOI
Please Login or Register
