The LG’s affidavit comes after the bench Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra has issued an order seeking LG’s response in the contempt case initiated by the Court against DDA Vice-Chairman Subhasish Panda over felling of around 1,100 trees allegedly for widening the road leading to CAPFIMS hospital.

According to the affidavit, it was only after the incident of illegal felling of trees that took place from February 16 to 26 that the LG was informed through a letter from the DDA vice-chairman on June 10 about the said development. The fact that court permission was required for the culling was first informed to the LG on March 21 when DDA proposed the constitution of an expert committee based on the directions of the MC Mehta case ( WP 4677/1985). The detailed affidavit also mentions three DDA officers responsible for ordering the felling of trees “on their own initiative”.

In his affidavit, the LG said the Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court had granted approval to the CAPFIMS project vide letter dated February 1, 2017, along with environmental clearance and approval from the National Board of Wildlife. Permission was also granted to establish the SAARC University to fulfill the country’s international obligations.

Notably, felling of trees was carried out for the road widening project from Main Chhattarpur Road to SAARC Chowk, Gaushala Road Row and from SAARC Chowk to CAPFIMS (Hospital) Row.

The affidavit states that for the project, precautions were taken to ensure as few trees on the ridge were affected. A total of 1,051 trees were to be affected, out of which 422 trees were to be cut/transplanted to non-forest land and 629 trees were to be cut to forest land.

However, contrary to the plan above, it is stated that 174 trees in the non-forest area and 486 trees in the forest area were actually cut down, making a total of 642 trees and not 1,100 trees as had been stated the petitioner before a contempt case. filed before the Delhi High Court in the case of Bhavreen Kandhari v. CD Singh and Ors on the same issue of felling trees for the CAPFIMS road.

It was also clarified that felling approvals were obtained from the Ridge Management Board (RMB) on June 18, 2024; and the Ministry of Environment and Forests on March 1, 2024. The Tree Officer (under the Delhi Tree Preservation Act, 1994) also issued permission to fell 422 trees on February 15, 2024 .

To the specific questions raised by the Court on October 16, the following answers are provided:

(1) While returning from visiting the CAPFIM hospital site on February 3, the LG also stopped at the road widening site. The LG declares that “no person present on the said site on the date of the visit brought to the attention of the Depositor the legal obligation to obtain authorization from this Hon’ble Court for the felling of trees” .

The LG was only informed that clearance for felling was awaited from the competent authority and therefore felling has not yet started. The affidavit then states:

“In this regard, the deponent informed that for the trees falling under DPTA, 1994, the Forest Department had already obtained the approval of the Minister (Environment and Forests) and the Hon’ble Chief Minister with my concurring opinion. The filer had observed that the officials concerned should expedite the communication of approval in this regard to the DDA. Regardless, the filer’s directive, by no stretch of the imagination, was to circumvent the law. The deponent had also given no instructions not to take any authorization, where required by law.

(2) The additional instructions given by the LG were: (a) clubbing all pending cases of land acquisition related to road widening to defend them in a coordinated manner; (b) the movement of BSES electrical poles, overhead and underground cables that could interfere with the progress of the project; (c)relocation of PNG gas pipelines obstructing the project; (d) movement of surplus soil stored at the CAPFIMS hospital to fill nearby low-lying areas.

(3) The affidavit states that the LG was informed about the Supreme Court’s clearance of tree felling only on March 21, 2024 after DDA proposed the constitution of an expert committee as per the instructions of the Court in the MC Mehta case. The fact that the actual felling of trees began around February 16, 2024 was only informed to the LG by a letter from the DDA Vice-President on June 10, 2024, “which was published in accordance with the instructions of this honorable “. Supreme Court.”

(4) The DDA Commission of Inquiry identified 3 key officers responsible for illegal felling of trees “on their own accord”: (iii) Shri Manoj Kumar Yadav, Executive Engineer, SMD 5, DDA who requested the contractor to cut down trees; (ii) Shri Pawan Kumar, AE-I, SMD-5, South Zone, Engineering Division, DDA and (iii) Shri Ayush Saraswat, AE-II, SMD-5, South Zone, Engineering Division, DDA. The consequences of their suspension and the disciplinary investigation were detailed in the affidavit dated June 18, 2024.

(5) The affidavit states that a detailed set of guidelines has been initiated at different levels of the DDA. The LG assures the Court that “existing structures and mechanisms will be examined thoroughly in light of the report and prompt measures will be taken which will not only reform the system but also introduce greater accountability and close monitoring of projects by senior officials.

(6) According to the affidavit, the DDA vice-president was undergoing surgery on February 16 at AIIMS and was not present at the site during the “unfortunate event of felling of trees that occurred between 16.2.2024 and 26.2.2024”. The LG requests the Court to discharge the Vice President from these contempt proceedings.

(7) Regarding the location of the felled timber, it is stated that after a joint inspection of the timber on July 3, 2024, the timber is now handed over to the Office of the Deputy Conservator of Forests and is now in possession and control. of the government forest department. NCT Delhi.

(8) A series of measures to restore felled trees was also taken. This includes following previous CAPFIMS road tree restoration instructions, leveling the road construction site, planting 170 trees and 400 shrubs on site as well as 200 trees and 500 shrubs which will be planted on the road Guashala next week.

Background

The case was heard several days in June-July by a panel composed of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, during which the DDA and its vice-president had to face several difficult questions from the judges. During the hearings, the bench observed that the documents pointed to the role of Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena, who happens to be the DDA chairman, in ordering felling of trees in Delhi’s ridge forest . The court also did not mince words in withdrawing the DDA for “concealment”. During the last hearing on July 12, the bench had warned that it would issue a contempt notice to the LG and adjourned the matter for further hearing on July 31.

Meanwhile, on July 24, another bench headed by Justice BR Gavai objected to Justice Oka’s court accepting the contempt petition. Justice Gavai observed that his bench had notified the DDA of a contempt petition (filed by another petitioner) regarding the same felled tree much before the bench of Justice Oka initiated the proceedings. The bench headed by Justice Gavai, noticing the parallel proceedings, referred the matter to the Chief Justice of India and held that all matters relating to the Delhi Ridge Forest would be dealt with by a single court.

Following this order from the bench of Justice Gavai, the matter was not listed before the bench of Justice Oka on the scheduled date of July 31.

Tree felling was carried out for the road widening project from Main Chhattarpur Road to SAARC Chowk, Gaushala Road Row and from SAARC Chowk to CAPFIMS (Hospital) Row.

Following the directions issued by Justice Oka on July 12, Chief Secretary to the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, Naresh Kumar, filed an affidavit stating that LG VK Saxena was not informed about the need for obtain court permission to fell trees in the South Ridge.

During the hearings before Justice Oka, the petitioner in the contempt case complained of being harassed by the Delhi Police, following which the Court made a stern observation that no authority should harass the applicant.

Case Details: Bindu Kapurea v. Subhasish Panda Dairy No. 21171-2024, In Re Subhasish Panda Vice-President DDA SMC(Crl) No. 2/2024