The Supreme Court has reversed its December 2019 order that allowed tree felling on non-forest and private lands within the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) without prior court permission.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order while reviewing an application that sought exemption from obtaining permission for tree cutting under agro-forestry activities.
The Court had earlier questioned why its previous order should not be recalled, as it seemingly permitted unrestricted tree felling. Upon further scrutiny, it was found that the application lacked clarity on the definition and scope of agro-forestry.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Directs Comprehensive Tree Census in Taj Trapezium Zone
The Court noted that while the plea advocated for the promotion of agro-forestry, one of its clauses also sought modifications to an earlier order dated May 8, 2015. This 2015 ruling mandated prior court approval for felling trees in the TTZ.
The applicant had requested the removal of this requirement for private and non-forest lands within the TTZ. However, the Court stated that it might have been misled into believing that the modification request pertained only to agro-forestry activities.
"However, prayer clause 'b' is for modification of order dated 8th May 2015 passed by this court which directs that no felling of trees can be made in the TTZ area without prior permission of this court. It is pertinent to note that prayer clause 'b' is not limited to agro-forestry."
Realizing the ambiguity and potential environmental risks, the Court recalled its December 11, 2019, order. Additionally, the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) has been directed to submit a detailed report within a month, clarifying the definition of agro-forestry and providing recommendations to promote it. Stakeholders were also permitted to present supporting materials to the CEC.
Alongside this matter, the Supreme Court addressed the illegal felling of 454 trees on private land at Dalmia Farms in Mathura-Vrindavan.
In December, the Court had issued a contempt notice to Shiv Shankar Agarwal, who admitted to cutting the trees without permission and submitted an unconditional apology. The CEC recommended imposing a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh and requiring compensatory afforestation.
"It will take 100 years minimum to regenerate or recreate the green cover created by 454 trees which were blatantly cut without permission of this court, though the embargo imposed by this Court is right from the year 2015."
Read Also:- Execution of Gift Deed After Arbitral Award Indicates Attempt to Evade Decree: Delhi High Court
Justice Abhay Oka strongly condemned the act, equating it to the loss of human lives.
"Such a brazen act of cutting 454 trees. It is like killing a large number of human beings. Or worse than that."
Although Agarwal claimed ignorance of the Court's prior order, the Court emphasized that the restriction on tree felling had been in place since 2015.
The Court acknowledged an order by the Vrindavan Development Authority, issued on October 23, 2024, which prohibited granting construction approvals for the affected site until the National Green Tribunal resolved the matter.
Despite Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi's plea for a penalty reduction and a request for compensatory afforestation at an alternative site, the Court upheld the CEC's recommendations.
"We accept the suggestions of CEC. We also direct that if permissions are granted to Mr. Shiv Shankar Agrawal to make any construction on the land in question or any change in relation to the land in question, the permission shall not be acted upon without leave of this Court."
Until Agarwal submits a compliance affidavit and the CEC certifies that all conditions have been met, the contempt notice will remain pending.
Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13381/1985
Case Title – MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
