MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Supreme Court Issues Strict Orders on Unauthorized Tree Felling by DDA in Delhi Ridge Area

05 November 2024 2:01 PM

By: sayum


DDA Must Account for Unauthorized Felling of Over 1,100 Trees and Undertake Restoration Measures. The Supreme Court of India has issued detailed and stern directives to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and its Chairperson following unauthorized tree felling in Delhi's protected Ridge area. In response to contempt petitions, the Court has demanded a full account of the ecological damage caused, disciplinary action against responsible officials, and a comprehensive plan for restoration and remediation. This order follows DDA's apparent violation of prior Supreme Court orders prohibiting any felling or construction in the Ridge without requisite permissions.

The case stems from long-standing public interest litigation regarding forest conservation, including the protection of the Ridge area in Delhi. In orders passed on February 8, 2023 and March 4, 2024, the Supreme Court had directed that no land allotment or tree felling should occur in the Ridge area without explicit approval. Despite this, a Central Empowered Committee (CEC) report revealed that the DDA proceeded with unauthorized felling of over 1,100 trees for road construction near the Ridge, violating the court's directives.

Accountability and Disciplinary Actions

  1. Identification of Responsible Officials: The Court has mandated that the DDA Chairperson identify officers responsible for unauthorized tree felling and for failing to obtain the Court’s permission before commencing the project.
  2. Disciplinary and Criminal Action: The Court has urged the Chairperson to initiate disciplinary proceedings and criminal prosecution against officials involved in the contemptuous acts without waiting for further court orders.

Detailed Affidavit from DDA Chairperson

The Chairperson of the DDA has been directed to file a personal compliance affidavit addressing the following points by October 22, 2024:

  • Knowledge and Approval: Clarification on whether the Chairperson was informed during a site visit on February 3, 2024 about the need for Court approval for tree felling and, if so, what steps were taken to obtain such permission.
  • Remediation Measures: A detailed plan for ecological restoration and mitigation of damage caused by unauthorized tree felling.
  • Timber Accountability: An inventory of the felled trees, and the method by which the timber was managed or disposed of.

Restoration and Remediation Efforts

The Court emphasized the need for a time-bound restoration plan to mitigate the environmental damage. The DDA has been directed to submit a remediation plan, including reforestation and soil restoration measures, to address the ecological impact of the unauthorized activities.

Role of Expert Committee

The Court has ordered the submission of a final report from an Expert Committee (constituted per its June 26, 2024, order) to assess the environmental impact of the project and provide recommendations on restoration. This report is expected by the next hearing date.

Observations and Reprimands by the Court

The Supreme Court expressed its strong disapproval of the DDA’s conduct, particularly noting that:

  • The DDA began tree felling even before filing an application for permission, which was subsequently rejected.
  • Misleading information may have been presented to the Chairperson of DDA, influencing their decision to authorize the road-widening project.
  • The actions of DDA officials reflect a blatant disregard for the Court’s environmental protection orders, which it described as “shocking” and warranting severe accountability measures.

Next Hearing and Compliance Review

The case is scheduled for a further hearing on October 22, 2024, during which the Court will review:

  • The compliance affidavit from the DDA Chairperson.
  • The final report of the Expert Committee on ecological impact.
  • Any disciplinary actions or criminal proceedings initiated against responsible officials.

The Supreme Court has reiterated that any future violations of its orders regarding environmental protections in the Ridge area will be met with stringent legal consequences, underscoring its commitment to preserving Delhi’s ecological balance.

  • Date of Order: October 16, 2024

Latest Legal News