The Supreme Court on Tuesday mandated a tree census in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) to ensure proper enforcement of the Uttar Pradesh Protection of Trees Act, 1976.

A bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and N. Kotiswar Singh instructed the TTZ authority to engage the Forest Research Institute (FRI) for a comprehensive survey of all trees in the region.

The court underscored that the 1976 Act aims to safeguard trees, and its provisions—such as the requirement for prior permission before felling and penalties for violations—can only be effectively implemented with an accurate record of existing trees.

“The provisions cannot be implemented unless the data of existing trees is available. The data can be made available only if the proper tree census is carried out. Without tree census there cannot be any effective implementation of the provisions of 1976 Act. We therefore direct the TTZ authority to appoint the Forest Research Institute (FRI) as an authority to carry out tree census of all the existing trees within the area of TTZ”, the order stated.

The Supreme Court has directed the TTZ authority to formally appoint the Forest Research Institute (FRI) within a week. Additionally, the court issued a notice to FRI, requiring it to submit an affidavit detailing the methodology and timeline for the tree census. If FRI needs expert assistance, it may propose names, and the court will provide necessary directions.

The affidavit must be submitted by the end of March 2025. Emphasizing seamless execution, the court instructed all local authorities, the state government, and TTZ authorities to extend full cooperation to FRI in conducting the census.

The Supreme Court has been actively overseeing concerns related to tree cover and illegal felling in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ). On November 22, 2025, the court underscored the necessity of a tree census and a vigilance mechanism to curb unauthorized deforestation in the ecologically sensitive region. It had also issued notice in a plea seeking the formation of a dedicated committee to investigate widespread illegal tree cutting.  

During previous hearings, the applicant’s counsel highlighted a 9 percent decline in forest cover over four years, noting that many felled trees were classified as “secured trees” under Uttar Pradesh government guidelines. Senior Advocate ADN Rao, serving as Amicus Curiae, suggested that along with the tree census, the Station House Officer (SHO) of the respective area should be held personally accountable for unauthorized tree felling.  

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati had earlier informed the court that FIRs had been lodged in cases of illegal tree felling and proposed that the Forest Department or the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) could be entrusted with conducting the census.

The Supreme Court also considered a plea seeking exemption from the requirement of prior permission for tree felling in agro-forestry activities. Justice Abhay S Oka questioned the rationale behind such an exemption, emphasizing that permission is necessary even for agro-forestry-related tree cutting. “If you want to fell trees, you have to obtain permission. Where is the question of exemption?” he remarked. He further stated, “We are sitting here; we will permit felling of trees if a case is made out. We don't know what agro-forestry is. These are all relative terms.”

Advocate Kishan Chand Jain argued that certain tree categories were exempt from prior permission requirements under the law and cited a previous Supreme Court order supporting this position. However, Justice Abhay S Oka maintained that permissions would still be necessary, highlighting the ambiguity of the term “agro-forestry.” “These are all relative terms,” he remarked.  

The court issued a notice to the applicant, questioning why the order dated December 11, 2019, should not be recalled. Expressing concern, Justice Oka observed that the order appeared to permit unrestricted tree felling. “By this, everyone will get permission to fell trees. And what is this industry? Nobody knows. We are shocked to know that this order takes away all the other orders of this court. We are spending so much time to save trees, and this direction completely reverses it. There is some lobby of agriculturists behind this. They are doing all this. Nobody has defined it,” he remarked.  

Clarifying its stance, the court ruled that its May 8, 2015, order—mandating that no tree felling within the TTZ area occurs without prior Supreme Court approval—would remain in effect. Additionally, it affirmed that the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Protection of Trees Act, 1976, would continue to apply to agro-forestry, meaning that necessary permissions must still be obtained before cutting any trees.