When Insider Does It Nobody Barks: Supreme Court Says Timber From Illegal Felling Of Trees Has Been Taken By Contractor In Connivance With DDA Officers, Issues Notice To Delhi Govt

The Supreme Court, today, issued notice in the contempt petition against the Delhi Government to explain the permission granted for the felling of trees for the construction of a road, without any power under the Delhi Preservation Of Trees Act, 1994 ('1994 Act') and observed stern remarks on the failure of the authorities as to the information of the location of timber which was obtained after felling of trees.

The Vacation Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed, "...The Government of NCT of Delhi has to explain the gross irregularity...Every violation and contravention of the 1994 Act is an offence punishable under Section 24 of the 1994 Act...Department of Forest was aware of the violation, but no steps were taken...There was an admitted violation. The Tree Authority is hardly functional. Issue notice of this contempt petition to the Government of NCT of Delhi through the Principal Secretary of Environment and Forest Department...He will file an affidavit explaining how the Government purported to grant permission for the felling of trees under the 1994 Act...Affidavit to be filed by the Secretary on or before 11th of July, 2024. We also issue notice to the Tree Authority constituted under Section 3 of the 1994 Act through its Chairman...We direct the Tree Officer to file an affidavit explaining the inaction of the Tree Authority. We direct the Tree Officer to immediately initiate an action under the 1994 Act by taking action of seizure of felled trees and parts thereof...We direct DDA to ascertain the location of felled trees."

The Court, prima facie, observed that the DDA failed to produce a report of the site visit of the Lieutenant General of Delhi and whether he had given any suggestion regarding cutting of trees. The Court issued notice to the Member Engineer Ashok Kumar Gupta, who was present there and directed him to file an affidavit not in the capacity of his post but in the capacity of the Officer of the Court.

"We are 100% sure that the timber has been taken away by the contractor with the connivance of DDA Authority...there is a famous Sherlock Holmes's Story Silver Blaze, so when an insider does it, nobody barks.", Justice Oka remarked.

"We will not run with the hammer in our hands against all authorities, but the truth must come before the Court, therefore, we are spending so much time.", Justice Oka retorted.

Justice Oka remarked, "When you file an affidavit and you cannot even find a simple thing?...This is not correct, we do not appreciate this...you cannot even get a simple information..."

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh appearing for DDA submitted that the officers of the Engineering Team called for a meeting. The Bench asked for the names of the engineers.

Justice Oka asked whether the DDA has informed other authorities as regards the violation of condition and where the trees have been taken away as there is a power of seizure under Section 15. "Who has taken it away? At least you should have inquired...That is a very valuable property.", Justice Oka asked.

"Nobody is aware what has happened to the timber...these are not loopholes...this is a complete brazen act which shows complete lack of understanding.", Justice Oka sternly remarked.

The counsel for the Department of Forest, Delhi submitted that a sum of 2.4 crores (approx.) have been deposited in March 2024 with respect to the timber.

Singh also submitted that around 630 trees were felled according to DDA.

The Court, thereafter, perused Section 15 of the 1994 Act which discusses the seizure of property and Section 3 which mentions the Establishment of the Tree Authority. The Bench said that the Act is silent upon the cognizance of offences under the Act. The Court also referred to Section 9(3) of the Act which discusses the limitation for obtaining permission to fell, cut, remove or dispose of, a tree. "Ask the DDA officers whether permission under Section 9 was taken by these officers or not. Whether they applied for permission or not.", Justice Oka said.

"He(officer) says that he applied under Delhi Act...he says this is happening based on in principle approval...he doesn't know ABCD of this and writing such things in an affidavit...in a contempt affidavit...This is completely illegal...he claims that he has filed an application under Section 9...where is that application? Ask him right now.", Justice Oka asked.

Singh replied that he filed the application before the key officer. The Court replied that he was not even part of the concerned authority under the Act.

"Delhi Government has committed the biggest blunder...notice needs to be issued", said Justice Oka.

The Court in this regard ordered, "The State Government has no authority to grant permission for felling of 472 trees...apart from this it is an admitted position that...DDA has indulged in cutting more than 200 trees than what was permitted. An amount payable was paid in the month of March 2024. Our impression is that many more than 633 trees were felled. When we made a query with the Vice Chairman, present here today, about where the timber is to be found, the officer had no answer. Immediate seizure under Sections 15 and 16 is required to be done. The State Government is not formally a party, though a counsel represents the Department of Forest. The State Government needs to answer as to how the State Government could serve the powers of the tree authorities by purportedly granting such permissions."

The Court also perused the report of the Committee of Experts and directed the DDA to implement the recommendations. "Green cover has been lost in these years...there has to be a concentrated effort by all authorities.", the Bench said.

The Court also issued notice to all the authorities of Delhi like NDMC, DMC, etc. to convene a meeting to implement the recommendations given by the Committee of Experts and to find out officers responsible for the illegal activities pertaining to felling of trees.

On June 24, 2024, observing that brazen acts of tree felling in the National Capital Territory of Delhi cannot be brushed aside lightly, the Supreme Court had sought a "clear" statement from the Vice President of the DDA about whether trees in the ridge area were cut on the orders of the lieutenant governor without its permission. The Bench had said it proposes to hold a detailed enquiry into the acts of the DDA which resulted in the destruction of several valuable trees and consequentially degradation of the environment. The Apex Court said it was very shocking that the trees were cut despite knowing that it cannot be done without the permission of the Apex Court.

The Apex Court had earlier issued a notice of criminal contempt against DDA vice-chairman Subhasish Panda for allowing large-scale felling of trees in the southern Ridge's Satbari area to construct a road from Chhattarpur to South Asian University. The Apex Court said it proposes to issue directions for a massive tree plantation drive in the entire National Capital Territory of Delhi and asked the DDA and Attorney General R Venkataramani to assist it in the matter.

It had expressed displeasure over a "misleading" affidavit filed by the vice chairman and presenting "wrong facts" before the court. It had also directed the planting of 100 new trees for each tree felled by the DDA.

Cause Title: Bindu Kapurea v. Subhasish Panda (Dairy No. 21171 of 2024) and In Re Subhasish Panda Vice Chairman, DDA (SMC(Crl) No. 2/2024)