Supreme Court Calls For Tree Census And Vigil Mechanism To Prevent Illegal Tree Felling In Taj Trapezium Zone

The Supreme Court recently emphasized the need for a tree census and a mechanism to prevent unauthorized tree felling in the environmentally sensitive Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ).

A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih issued notice returnable on November 29, 2024 in a plea seeking formation of a separate committee to conduct a thorough investigation of illegal felling of trees in Taj Trapezium Zone.

“Prima facie, we are of the view that there needs to be a census of existing trees in Taj Trapezium Zone area and there needs to be a mechanism for keeping a vigil for ensuring that there is no unauthorised felling of trees”, the Court stated.

The counsel for the applicant alleged widespread illegal tree felling in the TTZ, including unreported incidents, and called for an independent investigation. Citing a reduction in forest cover by 9 percent over the last four years, he urged the formation of a separate committee to oversee the issue and conduct a thorough inquiry.

The applicant's counsel highlighted that many of the trees being felled were designated as “secured trees” under guidelines issued by the Uttar Pradesh government, emphasizing the need for stricter enforcement.

Justice Oka underscored the importance of a tree census as a starting point for addressing the problem. “But now one issue has to be addressed. Mechanism has to be there to detect this activity there. In all Tree Authorities Act, there's a clause for tree census. So tree census has to be undertaken. Here, somebody has to undertake the tree census of the existing trees”, he said.

The Court referred to provisions in tree-related laws, such as the Tree Authorities Act, that mandate tree census to maintain an accurate record of existing trees. The bench also questioned which tree-related law was applicable to the TTZ and sought clarity on this matter.

Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate ADN Rao suggested that apart from a tree census, the Station House Officer (SHO) of the concerned area should be made personally liable for unauthorized tree felling. “One immediate suggestion is apart from enumeration, wherever the tree felling takes place, the SHO of the concerned area should be made personally liable.”

Justice Oka responded that the Court will do this but there has to be a tree census first. “That we will do, but today there is no data of how many trees are available, how many trees are existing. That data has to be collected.”

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati informed the Court that FIRs had been registered in cases involving illegal tree felling. She noted that some tree felling activities occurred overnight to evade permissions required for construction projects. She suggested that either the Forest Department or the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) could undertake the census.

Justice Oka reiterated the necessity of tree census, “This issue will not be resolved unless we undertake a Tree census. All Trees laws provide for tree census. Only if there is tree census, then there's the record to show how many trees were in existence.” 

The Court has also been considering the issue of enhancing the green cover in Delhi and setting up a mechanism to ensure compliance of Court orders regarding compensatory efforts while granting tree felling permissions.

The Court has previously mandated that public authorities seeking permission to cut trees for public projects must minimize tree felling by re-examining project alignments. The Court highlighted that Article 51A of the Constitution underlines the duty of citizens to protect the environment and the right to a healthy environment.

The Court in October warned that if project proponents do not comply with conditions of compensatory afforestation imposed while granting tree felling permissions, it will impose costs and order restoration of the lands apart from contempt action.

On August 20, the court expressed its intent to issue contempt notice on even slightest non-compliance of conditions imposed by it while permitting felling of large number of trees in Delhi. On July 19, the Court stressed the need for mechanism to ensure compliance with the orders passed by it regarding the felling of trees.

The Court has also taken a stern stance on unauthorized tree felling in Delhi, particularly in the Ridge Forest area, by initiating a contempt case against the chairman of the Delhi Development Authority.

Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13381/1985

Case Title – MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.