Juniors, Contractor Did It : DDA Vice Chairman Tells Supreme Court In Contempt Case Over Tree Felling In Delhi Ridge
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (May 14) indicated that it might initiate criminal contempt proceedings against the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) Vice Chairman in the matter concerning the rampant felling of trees in Delhi's Ridge Forest area in violation of its previous orders in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.“Subhasish Panda, DDA Vice Chairman appears before the court and...
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (May 14) indicated that it might initiate criminal contempt proceedings against the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) Vice Chairman in the matter concerning the rampant felling of trees in Delhi's Ridge Forest area in violation of its previous orders in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
“Subhasish Panda, DDA Vice Chairman appears before the court and accepts that not only the trees on the land vesting in the DDA were felled but even trees on the area of forest were felled. We direct the VC to file his personal affidavit on remedial measures which he proposes to take. Prima facie, this would amount to criminal contempt however, we'll pass appropriate order in this regard on the next date.”, the court said.
The bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan came down heavy on the DDA's Vice Chairman Subhasish Panda, who was physically present before the Court after he wasn't able to answer the specific queries of the court concerning the cutting of trees in Delhi's Ridge Forest Area.
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed contending that the Ridge which is the only forest region left in the National Captial of Delhi has been subjected to the illegal felling of the trees by the Delhi Development Authorities (DDA) to construct a 10.525 km long approach roads from the main Chattarpur Road to SAARC University, CAPFIMS and other establishments at Maidangarhi, Sayurpur and Satbari areas of Delhi.
On a previous occasion, the court issued a contempt notice to the government officials and directed them to be physically present before the Court on the next hearing.
Yesterday,the court straightway asked the DDA Vice Chairman Panda about who gave the authorization to cut down the trees.
“Firstly, tell us the name of the officers who authorized the cutting down of trees?”, asked Oka J.
Unable to state the names of the officers involved in the cutting of the trees, Panda replied that the exercise of cutting down trees was taken by the persons at the junior level.
In response to the court question i.e., upon whose instructions the entire exercise of cutting down the trees, Panda informed the court that the entire exercise was done by the contractor.
The Court asked Panda whether any authorization was given to the contractor, to cut the trees as the contractor was appointed only for the construction of the road. After finding that Panda was unclear about the position, the court remarked the entire exercise of cutting down the trees as a 'sad state of affairs'.
The court indicated that the entire exercise of cutting trees was done by the contractor without having any authorization from the DDA to cut the trees.
The court directed the DDA Vice Chairman to file an affidavit stating that he would restore the entire area where the trees were felt.
After Panda accepted that not only the trees on the land vesting in the DDA were felled but even trees on the area of forest were felled , the court asked Panda to file his personal affidavit on remedial measures that he proposes to take to restore the position as existed before the felling of trees.
The court ordered Panda to come out with an approximate figure of the trees felt and the names of the officers of the DDA who authorized the felling of trees. Further, Panda was asked to state the names of the officers who permitted the contractor to fall the trees.
The matter is next listed on Thursday (16.05.2024).
Case Details: Bindu Kapurea v. Subhasish Panda & Connected Matters Dairy No. 21171-2024