SC seeks to examine if panel took care before nod for removal of trees

Categories : Main Stories, National, Regional, Videos

The bench said it wishes to ascertain the process followed by CEC while reviewing the applications to cut trees

The bench asked senior advocates S Guru Krishna Kumar and Anitha Shenoy, who have been appointed as amicus curiae by the bench, to address the court on April 15 on the pertinent issues when the case is heard next. (HT Photo)

Every tree should be protected in some way, the Supreme Court has emphasised, seeking to examine whether the court-appointed central empowered committee (CEC) has taken the utmost care before permitting the removal of trees in the national capital for construction work or other projects.

Expressing concerns over “mechanical” approvals of felling of trees that in some cases, a bench of justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said that it would wish to ascertain the process followed by CEC while reviewing the applications to cut trees.

“Attempts should be made to protect every single tree. Whenever trees are to be felled for public purposes, they (CEC) must scrutinise whether trees are required to be felled or not. Then, the other exercise to follow is about the kind of saplings that should be planted…But there are no guidelines we see here,” remarked the bench earlier this week.

Underscoring the importance of tree protection measures, the court highlighted the need for thorough scrutiny by CEC, including the issues of translocation of trees and compensatory afforestation, before granting permission to remove trees.

“There are several aspects that must be taken care of…there cannot be mechanical approach when applications for the felling of trees are examined,” the bench told additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, who represented the Union government in the matter.

Bhati, on her part, informed the court that some of the issues, including the composition of CEC, were already being dealt with by another bench in the Supreme Court in separate proceedings.

In response, the bench expressed a willingness to focus on ensuring the proper functioning of CEC rather than delving into its composition. “We don’t wish to go into the constitution of CEC if that is already pending before the other bench. But we want to make sure that they (CEC) do their job properly,” it said.

The bench further remarked: “CEC was formed to reduce our workload and as the first level of scrutiny. After so many years, we will examine if it has actually reduced or has increased our work.”

It asked senior advocates S Guru Krishna Kumar and Anitha Shenoy, who have been appointed as amicus curiae by the bench, to address the court on April 15 on the pertinent issues when the case is heard next.

The bench was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL), which was brought before the court in 1985 by environmentalist MC Mehta and included a wide range of topics, from the felling of trees to the sealing of properties in Delhi. Some other petitions relating to sealing of properties in Delhi are also heard together with this PIL.

CEC, a body of experts, was constituted by the Supreme Court in 2002 to assist it in environmental matters. All applications for the felling of trees are first examined by the CEC that gives recommendations to the court for passing suitable orders.

Following a nudge from the top court, the ad hoc body was replaced with a statutory body in September 2023 and is currently headed by Siddhant Das, who is also serving as the chairperson of Odisha real estate regulatory authority. On March 31, a bench led by justice BR Gavai told the Centre that CEC must have a full-time chairperson.