The Supreme Court of India underscored the constitutional duty to protect trees while reviewing the NHAI’s request to fell over 800 trees for a highway project. The court warned against excessive requests, insisting on the necessity of compensatory afforestation before granting cutting permissions. The case raises concerns about balancing infrastructure development with environmental preservation.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday (Feb 11th) emphasized that protecting trees is a constitutional duty and warned public authorities against seeking permission to cut more trees than necessary. The court made these remarks while hearing a plea by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to fell over 800 trees for the construction of a six-lane highway between Agra and Gwalior in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ).
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan observed that public authorities frequently request permission to fell a larger number of trees than required, particularly in Delhi and TTZ. The bench stated:
“Practically in case of every application made in TTZ and in Delhi, we have noticed this tendency. It is the constitutional duty of all public authorities to save and protect as many trees as possible. Therefore, when applications are made seeking felling of trees, the authorities have to be meticulous and they should not apply for felling more trees than necessary.”
The court pointed out that while NHAI sought permission for cutting 850 trees, only 650 were actually required for the highway project.
The Centrally-Empowered Committee (CEC), which reviewed the proposal, recommended compensatory plantation of 9,000 trees at NHAI’s expense. The Supreme Court stressed that compensatory afforestation must be completed first before any permission to cut trees is granted. The bench directed:
“In a large number of cases, permission to fell trees is granted but compensatory afforestation is not implemented in true letter and spirit.”
The CEC has been tasked with monitoring the afforestation process and submitting a compliance report. Only after verifying compliance will the court consider granting permission for tree felling.
The proposed greenfield highway aims to improve road safety and connectivity between Gwalior and Agra via Dholpur and Morena. NHAI argued that the highway will reduce travel time, fuel consumption, and transportation costs, benefiting commuters and trade routes along National Highway-44.
Despite the project’s importance, the Supreme Court remains firm on ensuring environmental protection and preventing unnecessary loss of trees. The case highlights the ongoing struggle between infrastructure development and ecological preservation in India.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE