On Friday, the Delhi High Court criticized the Delhi forest department for issuing orders that lacked clear explanations and appeared to follow established patterns, which permitted the cutting down of trees in the nation's capital.

Justice Jasmeet Singh made an oral comment, stating that the forest department and its officials' nonchalant attitude has contributed to the severe air pollution in the city, with the Air Quality Index (AQI) reaching alarming levels.

Justice Jasmeet Singh expressed his concerns by saying, "Do you desire residents to reside in hazardous environments akin to gas chambers? You bear responsibility for the dire pollution situation faced by Delhi's citizens today. Air quality monitoring machines have an upper limit of 999, and we are currently approaching that limit. The lack of sensitivity among officials is evident."

The court was addressing a contempt petition that had been filed against the Delhi forest authorities. This petition alleged that they had been permitting the cutting down of trees using brief and non-explanatory orders without providing any justification for such decisions.

In a previous ruling on September 14, 2023, the same court had issued an order, stating that no approvals should be given for tree felling to construct houses within the city. Furthermore, in August, the court had declared that no authorizations for tree felling, even for individuals, would be sanctioned, and any necessary permissions for significant projects would need to be reported to the court.

Advocate Aditya N Prasad represented the petitioner, Bhavreen Kandhari, and asserted that despite explicit instructions from the High Court requiring officials to issue comprehensive and well-justified orders, they continued to issue orders lacking reasoning, resulting in the felling of trees.

During the proceedings, the Court reviewed certain orders issued by the forest officials and determined that these orders were in direct contravention of the court's directives.

The Court emphasized that it is not opposed to development, but development should occur in harmony with nature and heritage. The court clarified its position, stating that it doesn't obstruct development efforts. For instance, if there's a traffic jam, widening the roads may be necessary. However, this should not involve the indiscriminate cutting down of 50 trees. Only if there is no alternative should such actions be taken. The Court emphasized the importance of preserving trees and finding alternative solutions, expressing concerns about making entire neighborhoods devoid of trees.

Justice Singh indicated that during the next hearing, he will contemplate issuing contempt of court notices against the forest officials for their actions. The proceedings were postponed to November 8 since an application filed by the government requesting clarification of the Court's order was not available in the records.