New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked Delhi Development Authority (DDA) chairperson and Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) V K Saxena to personally file an affidavit making full disclosure on issues in connection with the alleged felling of trees in the national capital's ridge area.
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra asked the DDA chairperson to explain if there was any information on discussions regarding the permission to cut trees.
The CJI asked, whether during the course of the site visit on February 3, 2024, was there any intimation furnished to the chairperson of the DDA on the permission required to be obtained from this court for the felling or removal of trees.
"Secondly, in the event of the answer to above question is positive, what steps were taken to ensure the permission of this court is obtained before the actual work of felling took place; three, in the event the answer to the above is negative when was the chairperson of the DDA made aware of the fact that a permission for the felling of trees from this court is required," said the bench, in its order.
The bench noted that the actual act of felling trees commenced on or about February 16, 2024, even before an application was moved before this court and which was eventually dismissed by order dated 4 March 2024. The bench asked what steps were taken for the remediation or restoration of the ecological damage which has been caused for the felling of trees despite the admitted absence of any permission from this court as required?
"What steps have been taken to identify the officers responsible for: wilful act of suppression from this court in the application filed for permission of the fact that felling of trees had already taken place even before the application was filed without intimation….," said the bench.
The bench sought to know whether any disciplinary proceedings have been instituted against the official responsible; and whether in the view of the chairperson of the DDA, criminal action would be taken against all officials responsible for the breach of the binding directions of this court.
The apex court asked, whether the chairperson of the DDA is of the view that such disciplinary action and initiation of criminal prosecution should be taken up, "we would expect such action should be taken in the interregnum without waiting for direction of this court".
"The affidavit should be personally filed by the chairperson of the DDA making a full disclosure both on the basis of the material on record of the facts which are in his personal knowledge, bearing in mind the site visit on February 3, 2024," said the CJI.
The top court said the affidavit shall also specifically explain the manner in which the timber of the trees which were felled has been dealt with, and also indicate whether the timber has been inventoried. The apex court said the DDA chairperson shall take steps to affix accountability in respect of any act of omission or commission by the officials or any third parties involved. The bench, while scheduling the matter for further hearing on October 22, said, "we only want the chairperson to tell us….".
The bench made it clear that it has asked for an affidavit on the basis of the records and on the basis of personal knowledge. Senior advocates Mahesh Jethmalani and Maninder Singh represented the Delhi LG and DDA before the top court.
"Before we take action, we want action to be taken by the DDA. By next week, we want action both in terms of disciplinary, initiation of criminal prosecution and accountability of everyone involved, including the lifting of the timber”, said the CJI, concluding the hearing. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayan, appeared for the petitioner Bindu Kapurea.
The apex court passed the order in the contempt case initiated by the court against the vice chairman of the DDA, Subhasish Panda, over the felling of about 1100 trees purportedly for the widening of the road to CAPFIMS hospital. The apex court noted that originally it was contemplated that there were 442 trees in non-ridge trees, but what was felled was 1100 trees in the ridge.
In August, the CJI decided to hear a contempt case, after a rare standoff between two separate benches of the apex court in connection with the illegal felling of trees in the ridge area.
On July 24, a bench presided by Supreme Court judge Justice B R Gavai expressed its displeasure regarding another bench presided by Justice A S Oka also proceeding with contempt proceedings against the DDA in relation with tree felling on the approach road to the under-construction Central Armed Police Forces Institute of Medical Sciences in southwest Delhi’s ridge area.
Justice Gavai, who is in line to become the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in May 2025, said the other bench "has not adhered to judicial propriety", against the backdrop that the bench led by him was already seized of the matter.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing the DDA vice-chairman, had contended before the bench led by Justice Gavai that the institute in the ridge area was established after favourable conclusions from the apex court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the court itself.
