legrandangle-lgm

The Supreme Court on Friday (November 29) issued contempt notices to owners of Dalmia Farm, a private land in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) for felling 454 trees in the area without prior permission of the Court.

A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustinus George Masih was hearing the MC Mehta case on illegal felling of trees in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ).

“Prima facie, we are of the opinion that the persons mentioned in paragraph 8 of the report are guilty of civil contempt. We are therefore sending them a notice returnable on December 16, calling on them to show cause why action under contempt of court should not be initiated against them.”, said the Court.

In addition, the court has determined that no logging activities for which permission has been granted may take place in the TTZ area between 6 p.m. and 8 a.m.

The court also asked the Uttar Pradesh government to consider amending the Uttar Pradesh Tree Conservation Act to tighten the penalties and amount allowed for violations of the law.

“We are of the opinion that the provisions regarding punishment under Articles 10 and 15 are inadequate and not sufficient to deter persons from illegally felling trees. Even the amount by which the offense can be aggravated, as stated in Article 15, is too low. We request the State Government to reconsider the sections and consider amending them appropriately to increase the amount mentioned in Sections 10 and 15.”, said the Court.

The Court was dealing with the recent illegal felling of 454 trees on private land in the Mathura-Vrindavan area for the purpose of building a colony, as detailed in a report filed by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC).

The Supreme Court noted that the felling of trees was in violation of previous Supreme Court orders May 8, 2015 (commitment from the TTZ authority that no trees will be felled in TTZ without first obtaining permission from the Supreme Court), and December 8, 2021. The court found that the persons mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the report appeared to have committed civil contempt.

Amicus Curiae, senior advocate ADN Rao, suggested that the Court impose a restriction on felling of trees after 6pm, noting that most cases of illegal logging take place at night.

Judge Oka asked if there was a law on cutting down trees. Rao referred to the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati informed the Court that cases had been registered against the landowners for illegal logging under various laws including the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, the Indian Forest Act, the Wildlife Protection Act and the Environment Protection Act. Bhati further suggested that issuing contempt notices would further empower the authorities to act against the offence.

The Court described the findings of the CEC report as ‘shocking’. The report shows that 454 trees were felled illegally during the night of September 18 to 19, 2024. Of these, 422 trees were on private land, also called Dalmia Farm, located on the Vrindavan-Chatikara road in Mathura district. 32 trees came from a roadside protected forest adjacent to the private property.

The court issued notices to the landowners mentioned in paragraph 8, directing them to appear on December 16, 2024, and indicating why action under the Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated. It also ordered a status quo for any work or construction at Dalmia Farm.

The court directed the registry to forward the notices to the Superintendent of Police (SP), Mathura for notification. The SP was instructed to ensure that the SHO of the local police station visits the Dalmia Farm to prevent further logging or construction work.

Tree census and penalty provisions

Last week the Supreme Court did that emphasized the need for a tree count and a mechanism to prevent unauthorized felling of trees in the TTZ.

Today, Justice Oka asked whether the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act has provisions for a tree census. The parties’ counsel have stated that this is not the case. Justice Oka emphasized that a tree count is necessary and directed the parties to receive instructions on how it could be carried out.

ASG Bhati suggested that the Forest Survey of India (FSI), which has expertise in conducting tree cover surveys, could take up this task. Justice Oka suggested that the FSI be directed to conduct the census, starting with the TTZ area. The case will be heard further on December 16.

ASG Bhati also highlighted the inadequacy of the penal provisions under the Uttar Pradesh Preservation of Trees Act, 1976. She pointed out that the penalty for offenses under Section 10 is only Rs. 1,000 and requested the Court to consider issuing directions to increase the penalty, at least in the TTZ area.

The Court noted in its ruling that Articles 10 and 15 of the law impose inadequate penalties that cannot discourage illegal felling of trees. It requested the Uttar Pradesh government to reconsider and amend these sections to tighten the penalties and amount allowed for aggravated offences.

The case has been postponed until December 16, 2024.

Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No 13381/1985

Case title – MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.