Supreme Court Orders Tree Census In Taj Trapezium Zone, Directs Forest Research Institute To Conduct Survey

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered a tree census in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) to ensure the effective implementation of the Uttar Pradesh Protection of Trees Act, 1976.

A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice N Kotiswar Singh directed the TTZ authority to appoint the Forest Research Institute (FRI) to conduct a survey of all existing trees in the area.

The court emphasized that the 1976 Act is meant to protect trees, and its provisions—such as requiring permission before felling and imposing penalties for violations—can only be enforced if there is an accurate record of existing trees.

“The provisions cannot be implemented unless the data of existing trees is available. The data can be made available only if the proper tree census is carried out. Without tree census there cannot be any effective implementation of the provisions of 1976 Act. We therefore direct the TTZ authority to appoint the Forest Research Institute (FRI) as an authority to carry out tree census of all the existing trees within the area of TTZ”, the order stated.

The TTZ authority has been directed to issue a formal order appointing FRI within a week. The court also issued notice to FRI, asking it to submit an affidavit outlining the process and timeline for conducting the census. If FRI requires expert assistance, it may propose names, and the court will issue appropriate directions. The affidavit must be filed by the end of March 2025. The court made it clear that all local authorities, the state government, and TTZ authorities must fully cooperate with FRI in carrying out the tree census.

Tree Census And Vigilance Mechanism

The Supreme Court has been closely monitoring the issue of tree cover and illegal tree felling in the TTZ. On November 22, 2025, the court had stressed the need for a tree census and a vigilance mechanism to prevent unauthorized cutting of trees in the environmentally sensitive zone. The bench had issued notice in a plea seeking the formation of a separate committee to investigate widespread illegal tree felling in the region.

During earlier hearings, the applicant's counsel cited a 9 percent reduction in forest cover over four years and pointed out that many of the felled trees were designated as “secured trees” under Uttar Pradesh government guidelines. Senior Advocate ADN Rao, acting as Amicus Curiae, suggested that apart from conducting a tree census, the Station House Officer (SHO) of the concerned area should be made personally liable for unauthorized tree felling.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati has earlier informed the court that FIRs had been registered in cases of illegal tree felling and suggested that either the Forest Department or the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) could undertake the census.

The Court has repeatedly underscored the necessity of a tree census. “Today, there is no data on how many trees are available, how many trees are existing. That data has to be collected,” Justice Oka observed in a previous hearing.

Exemption From Prior Tree Felling Permission For Agro-Forestry

Today, the Court also examined a plea for exemption from requirement of prior tree-cutting permissions for agro-forestry activities. Justice Oka questioned whether there was any basis for exempting agro-forestry from the requirement of obtaining permission for felling trees. “Even for so-called agro-forestry, if you want to fell trees, you have to obtain permission. Where is the question of exemption?” he asked, adding “We are sitting here. we will permit felling of trees if a case is made out. We don't know what agro-forestry is. These are all relative terms.”

Advocate Kishan Chand Jain submitted that the law exempts certain categories of trees from the requirement of prior permission. He also referred to a previous Supreme Court order to that effect. However, Justice Oka stated that permissions would still be required and noted that the term “agro-forestry” was vague. “These are all relative terms," he said.

The court issued notice to the applicant, asking why an order dated December 11, 2019, should not be recalled. Justice Oka remarked that the order seemed to allow unrestricted tree-felling. “By this everyone will get the permission to fell trees. And what is this industry nobody knows. We are shocked to know that this order takes away all the other orders of this court. We are spending so much time to save trees and this direction comes and goes the other way. There is some lobby of agriculturists. They are doing all this. Nobody has defined it,” he observed.

In its order, the court clarified that the order dated May 8, 2015, which imposed a condition that the TTZ Authority will ensure that no felling of trees within the TTZ area takes place without prior permission of the Supreme Court, would continue to apply. It also ruled that the provisions of the 1976 Act would remain in force for agro-forestry, meaning that required permissions must still be obtained before cutting any trees.

Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13381/1984

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

Click Here To Read/Download Order