Supreme Court Raps Delhi, Infra Body Over Tree Cutting In Ridge Area

New Delhi: Making its intention of getting to the root of the matter clear, the Supreme Court on Wednesday rapped not only the Delhi Development Authority but also the Delhi government for illegal tree cutting in the ridge area, which is an extension of the Aravallis. Ordering criminal action against the DDA officials responsible for the lapse, the court said there had been “a fantastic lapse” on the part of the Delhi government, under whom the Tree Authority is supposed to function. 

While the allegation is that 1,100 trees have been cut in the area, the DDA has said that the  number is 630 and the felling was done for the widening of a road.

The court also used a Sherlock Holmes reference and wondered why “the dog didn’t bark” when the timber from the felled trees was taken away, hinting that there may be some inside involvement.

Continuing from the last hearing where the court had asked whether Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena had ordered the cutting of the trees, the court said the DDA vice-chairman should come to it with clean hands, adding “there cannot be any cover-up, even if something has been done by the highest authority”.

The court’s crackdown and strong comments come at a time when Delhi and the National Capital Region are sizzling under a record heatwave. Pollution, especially in the winter, has also been a problem over the past few years. 

Picking up where they had left during the last hearing on Monday, a special bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan asked the DDA whether it had been able to locate a record of the Lieutenant Governor (LG’s) visit to the area on February 3.  Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the authority, said officials are still trying to locate the documents, prompting a sharp response from the bench. 

“This is absolute recklessness on your part. You cannot find a simple document. Nothing has been done and no meeting of the officers has been called. I really hope the (DDA) Vice Chairman is taking the matter seriously. We have the doubts about the way things are being done,” Justice Oka fumed. 

When Mr Singh said the LG had visited a hospital and not the site, Justice Oka added, “When the LG visited, was it not the responsibility of DDA to look into the visit? You are only protecting the higher officer and shifting the blame to the lower officers, isn’t this true?”

As the hearing progressed, Mr Singh admitted that there had been some loopholes, but the bench was in no mood to relent. “This is no loophole. DDA has to be the first offender here. This is an absolutely brazen act without thinking about protecting the environment,” Justice Oka said.

The bench gave the DDA a week to comply with its directions. 

‘Set Criminal Law In Motion’

Moving on to the Delhi Government, the court asked why the Tree Authority had not taken any action when it knew about the cutting of trees. “One thing is clear that this is a fantastic lapse by Delhi Government. It takes up the complete power of Tree authority,” it said. 

Pointing out that it had been stated that the Tree Authority was not even properly functional, the court issued a notice to the Delhi government. 

“We direct Principal Secretary to ensure that criminal law may be set in force… The secretary should also state whether the tree authority under 1994 Act is fully constituted and whether the same is functioning. We also issue notice to Tree Authority (part of office of Forest Department) constituted under Section 3 through its member-secretary. We direct the Tree officer to explain inaction in the instant case on the acts of DDA,” the bench said in its order. 

It asked the Principal Secretary to reply to the notice on or before July 11. 

‘Dog Didn’t Bark’

Indicating it was sure that the timber from the trees that were cut had been taken by the contractor and that this was not the first time something like this had happened, the court said, “We are 100% sure that timber will be taken away and sold with the connivance of the officer of by the DDA. We need to find out why the dog didn’t bark.”

“We are also 100% sure that this is just the tip of the iceberg. So many trees must have been felled, only this time it has come forward. We have to take a strong action to send some signals,” Justice Bhuyan said.