Delhi HC Halts Pruning Of Trees Until Forest Department Comes Up With SOP On Compliance Under DPTA
The Delhi High Court has ordered for halting of pruning of trees until Department of Forest and Wildlife comes up with Guidelines or Standard of Procedure in consonance with the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act.
The Court was considering a Contempt Petition against Deputy Conservator of Forests for failure to specify reasons to permit cutting of trees.
The single-bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh observed, ".....it is directed that all the DCFs shall ensure that no pruning is undertaken till the Department of Forest and Wildlife has a mechanism/guidelines/SOP in place to ensure that the pruning is done and monitored in accordance with the provisions of DPTA. In case pruning is to be undertaken for reasons, as envisaged under the provisions of the DPTA, the Department of Forest shall ensure an eligible and responsible person is present to supervise the same."
The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Aditya N Prasad while the Respondent was represented by Senior Advocate Sanjeev Sabharwal.
Counsel for the Petitioner handed over a permission wherein permission was granted for ‘light pruning’ of trees (maximum of 3 or 4 branches, girth up to 40 cm) at Jungpura Extension by the Tree Officer & Deputy Conservator of Forest, South Forest Division and at Hauz Khas Enclave by the Tree Officer & Deputy Conservator of Forest, South Forest Division.
On Court's query as to how compliance of permission for pruning were being ensured, DCF (South) responded that it is the concerned land owning agency which is to ensure compliance of the orders passed by the DCF. The Court found the same to be unsatisfactory. It cited its ruling in Prof. Dr. Sanjeev Bagai v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 wherein the Court had set aside the Guidelines for Pruning of Trees and left it open to the Department of Forest to draft fresh guidelines/rules. It was further noted that no pruning of trees will be permitted in Delhi except in accordance with the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994.
The Court pointed out that in complete contravention of the ruling, the DCF continued to issue permissions for pruning of trees both for alleged ‘light pruning’ and ‘heavy pruning’ with the said figures once again having no scientific backdrop and no statutory backing.
"It seems that the Deputy Conservator of Forest, South Forest Division is not aware of the statutory duty and responsibility cast upon the Department of Forest and Wildlife. This court has time and time again reminded the DCF of their role of preservation of trees, which is the primary objective behind the statute and that permission for felling, cutting, removing or disposing of a tree under section 9 of the DPTA cannot be passed in a causal and cavalier manner. Rather, Section 9 of the DPTA in itself restricts such permission to be given only in exceptional circumstances and only after due inspection of the trees concerned," the Court observed.
The Court stated that the Department of Forest expects land owning agencies to adhere to its pruning permissions without verifying whether the landowning agencies have the wherewithal to comply with its permission granted.
"More often than not, the permissions are violated and the Department of Forest issues show-cause notices to the said agencies, which in no way reverses the irreparable damage caused to the trees and to the environment at large. It is pertinent to note that the role of the DCF is not only punitive but is more importantly preventive," the Court remarked.
The Court therefore issued Show-Cause Notice to the Deputy Conservator of Forest, South Forest Division as to how the blanket permissions for pruning of trees was given without due inspection or reasons in contravention to the provisions of DPTA and asked for reply within two weeks.
It also took note of the "undated" order issued by the Public Works Department, Government of Delhi (PWD), wherein 1,20,000 sq.mtr. of the forest area, being part of the Southern Ridge, was permitted to be cleared by the Executive Engineer for C/O World Class Skill Centre and called the same to be "unacceptable".
"It seems that the DCF is under an impression that trees are a dispensable commodity and that the Ridge is the only area which can be utilized for additional space requirements," the Court observed.
The Court also called out the failure of the Forest Department to keep a check on the rampant felling of trees continuing in Delhi.
Cause Title: Bhavreen Kandhari vs. C.D. Singh & Ors.
Appearances:
Petitioner- Advocate Aditya N Prasad, Advocate Pratyush Jain, Advocate Poorvi Rewalia, Advocate Gautam Narayan, Advocate Prabhsahay Kaur, Advocate Asmita Singh. Advocate Satyakam, Advocate Tushar Nair, Advocate Punishk Handa, Advocate Anirudh Anand, Senior Advocate Ankit Jain with Advocate Divyanshu Rathi, Advocate Aditya Chauhan
Respondent- Senior Counsel Sanjeev Sabharwal, Assistant Senior Counsel Mehak Nakra, Advocate Tarun Johri, Advocate Vishwajeet Tyagi, Advocate Ankur Gupta, Advocate Avshreya Pratap Singh, Advocate Harshita Chaturvedi, Advocate Usha, Advocate Rajesh Katyal, ASG Chetan Sharma with CGSC Amit Gupta, CGSC Balendu Shekhar, Advocate Shubham Sharma, Advocate Krishna Chaitanya, ASC Hetu Arora Sethi, Advocate Arjun Basra, Senior Advocate Apurv Kurup.
