"Citizens Should Not Suffer Due To Callous Disregard Of Environment Protection Rules": Delhi HC Expresses Dismay Over Victimization Of Trees

The Delhi High Court on Friday expressed its dismay over the issue of victimization of trees in city's Chittaranjan Park area, while observing that the citizens of the city should not suffer due to the callous disregard of rules and orders by authorities, which are put in place in order to protect the environment.

Justice Najmir Waziri was dealing with a contempt petition raising the issue of laying down of pipelines or cable lines being undertaken by BSES Rajhdhani Power Limited on Bipin Chandra Pal Marg and nearby areas at Chittaranjan Park, which had damaged the roots of the standing trees, especially within one meter radius of the Trees.

The plea moved through Advocates Aditya N Prasad and Dhriti Chhabra stated that the aforesaid action was in violation of various orders of the High Court as well as the National Green Tribunal which mandated leaving of one meter kutcha space around trees while undertaking any construction activity. 

The plea added that the competent authorities regarding implementation of laws pertaining to preservation of Trees, in complete subjugation of their statutory responsibilities, had abetted the said work. 

During the course of hearing today, Prasad argued that while the road happened to be under the PWD, the work was being carried out by respondent no. 1, BSES Rajhdhani Power Limited.

The Court noted that ex facie, the distance from the tree trunk was less than one metre and such digging and cutting up of roots was in clear violation of the orders of the High Court and also of the NGT.

"This Court has in various orders directed the Govt Departments and agencies in Delhi to strictly adhere to the directions of the NGT. Somehow, the disposition of some authorities and agencies appears to be callous and not cared towards complying much with said directions. While such non compliance may entail criminal proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, it does, in the interim, harm and victimize the trees leading to eventual damage to the environment," the Court said

Perusing the photographs on record, the Court was of the view that the directions of the NGT had been consciously breached and that contempt had been committed by the respondent authorities.

At the outset, Senior Advocate Sudhir Nandrajog appearing for BSES Rajdhani Power Limited submitted that a stretch of mere 70 metres was dug up for laying of underground electricity cables and that BSES had in fact ensured that the trees are not been vicitimized. He also argued that the one metre distance from the tree trunk was also maintained.

The Court took note of the fact that on January 17, 2022, the PWD had cautioned the BSES apropos the necessity to ensure that excavation, as may be, would be carried out by the BSES maintaining a one metre radius from the trees.

"The BSES was also informed that if the damage is done to the trees due to excavation and digging work, then the BSES would be responsible for the same. Three days later, after inspection of the site, the PWD inspected the site and found that damage to the trees had been done and intimated the BSES vide letter dated 20.01.2022," the Court noted.

The Bench also took note of the fact that the petitioner had not only informed the local police station, i.e., the SHO, CR Park Police Station but also a number of other agencies including PWD, BSES, Forest Department, Tree Helpline as under.

"Yet no remedy has been set in place at the site. The abandonment of the trees is as evident as seen in the photographs reproduced herein above. The Court is of the view that contempt has been committed by the respondents. There has been dereliction of duties. The PWD should have stopped the work immediately. The Tree Officer should have initiated action immediately upon information," the Court observed at the outset.

At the outset, the Court was apprised by Mr. Jawed representing respondent nos. 2 to 6, that the concerned Tree Officer had issued a notice after which the work in question was stopped and that the Director had also compounded the offence.

Hearing this, Justice Waziri orally remarked thus:

"What do you mean by compounding it? There is a certain element of sensitization. I just saw the photographs, these trees are 25 years old at least. And that is what gives ambience to the entire area, CR Park. How can this person come up and say 'hum khod denge isko'. This is not how it should be done. You can't go about damaging just because some money is being spent on that project. As if people don't matter, the neighbourhood doesn't matter. I am just very dismayed about the approach."

The Court was also of the view that the Tree Officer himself would need to answer the allegations made in the petition and that it would be appropriate that the head of the department, Principal Chief Conservator of Forest of the Delhi Government looks into the matter for addressing the issues urgently.

"In these circumstances, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, GNCTD is impleaded as respondent no 7," the Court said.

The Court therefore issued notice of contempt to BSES Rajhdhani Power Limited, Executive Engineer of PWD, Engineer-in-Chief of PWD (GNCTD), Station House Officer and Investigating Officer of Police Station Chittaranjan Park, Tree Officer or Deputy Conservator of Forest of the concerned area (GNCTD).

The Court was of the view that the presence of respondent authorities was necessary for the simple reason that the damage of the environment and to the new trees should not be allowed to carry on.

"Systems will have to be put in place. Citizens of Delhi should not suffer because of such callous disregard of rules and regulations and orders to protect the environment," the Court observed.

It added "There is no intimation to the public as to when the work started and when it has to be finished. Surely the general public cannot be at the mercy of the department as to period for which the work will go on and when the footpath would be restored."

Furthermore, the Court also noted that the road of pavements had been realigned and that the same were shortened. The Court said that the same evidently meant that a person with wheelchair bound would find it extremely difficult to maneuver on the said footpath.

"The ongoing construction work is clearly not in tandem with requirements under Persons with Disabilities Act for which an exercise is already underway in a petition which was listed yesterday. Quite clearly, there is a lack of coordination if not insensitivity to the needs of people," the Court ordered.

It added "The Engineer and Chief of the PWD shall answer as to how and in what circumstances the width of the footpath was reduced and the new so called channel or well for water harvesting was created on road, without keeping in mind needs of persons with disabilities."

Further observing that the footpaths should be user friendly for all, for the able bodied and those who fall within the definition of persons with disabilities Act, the Court directed that Status quo at the site would be maintained till such time that the reply is filed by the authorities concerned.

Perusing other photographs on record, the Court noted that l the road width had been extended and the width of footpaths was reduced "for the reason best known to the PWD."

"The manholes are about 3 to 4 inches above the footpath which makes the footpath absolutely unusable. It should be of the even level. This will be rectified by the PWD and an answer shall be furnished by Engineer in Chief as to how this was allowed," the Court said at the outset.

It observed "No person on a wheelchair or moving with a walker or crutches will be able to use the footpath. Instead of facilitating the movement of citizens, the PWD has only created hurdles in the free movement of people."

During the course of the hearing, the Court expressed its displeasure over the actions of the PWD qua rights of persons with disabling.

"What was the Executive Engineer doing? He has no idea what's going on, totally lost. Has he read the Persons with Disabilities Act? Is he aware that there is an exercise going on by the Secretary involving every agency in Delhi? PWD ke Chief Engineer ki level ki baat nahi hain ye. Crores of money is being spent on this. Can any person with wheelchair can get on this?" Justice Waziri remarked orally.

He added "You reduce the width of the footpath, if someone has to go near the tree, how will they manoeuvre? Somebody with a wheelchair? As if a person with wheelchair doesn't exist in this Country. Unke adhikaar kam hain kya auro se? The earlier distance was good enough but this Engineer comes and reduces it."

"Kiske adhikaar se kam kardi sadak ye? How they reduced this?"

Agreeing to the concerns shown by the Court, Nandrajog submitted that the position would have been better if the authorities had taken an action two or three decades ago.

On this, Justice Waziri added:

"Mr. Nandrajog, I will say this from my personal experience, every time this has been done, I go and try to tend to those damaged trees. I have been doing this for the last many 9-10 years now. When you see the fresh leaves coming out, it's so rewarding when you see a healed tree."

The Court therefore perused the Photographs showing that ramps had been built on footpaths which in law was not permissible unless the PWD had not given permission to them.

"Surely, no private individual can construct a land on a public footpath. The Engineer in Chief of PWD shall set aright all such anomalies which it may notice and an exercised to be carried out within next three days," the Court ordered.

It added "The order be placed before the Chief Secretary of GNCTD for him to set in motion remedial measures within a week."

"The Engineer in Chief of PWD shall initiate enquiry against officers who may be found defaulting in carrying out the project and ensuring that the footpath which is to be maintained by pwd has been rendered unusable."

The matter will now be heard on March 14.

Case Title: New Delhi Nature Society v. Rajesh Bansal & Ors.