The Supreme Court maintained its stringent position against tree-cutting in an eco-sensitive area of the national capital, reprimanding the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), the AAP government, and the contractor for failing to inform Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena about the necessary requirements prior to authorizing the felling of trees.

"It appears that no one - including the contractor, Delhi government and DDA - apprised the Lt Governor (L-G) that permission of Supreme Court needs to be obtained before cutting the trees," it said.

"We have perused the two affidavits filed by the vice-chairman of DDA and also the perused affidavit filed by the secretary, forest department. There was reluctance to remember what exactly transpired during L-G's visit. Now the truth has come out. Mr Ashok Kumar Gupta's affidavit explicitly stated what exactly transpired," the court said.

On June 26, the Supreme Court directed DDA officer Ashok Kumar Gupta to submit "a detailed affidavit" outlining the events that took place during Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena's visit to the Ridge area, where 1,100 trees were cut down. The court also instructed Gupta to specify if the L-G had issued any oral directions during the visit.

The Supreme Court, referencing the affidavit submitted by Mr. Kumar, stated, "We find that officers attached to the L-G, the chief secretary, the principal secretary of the forest department, and the principal commissioner were present at the meeting. The most unfortunate part is that none of these officials pointed out the requirement of obtaining court permission for felling trees in the ridge area, nor the need for permission from the tree officer for felling trees in other areas."

The Aam Aadmi Party, led by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, has alleged that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) cut down 1,100 trees in the southern Ridge area based on verbal instructions from Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena.

"If any officers informed the LG, they are free to file their affidavit. Mr Gupta's affidavit to be supplied to all the officers," said the Supreme Court.

The court issued a notice to the contractor and queried "on whose directions trees were cut".

"Did DDA proceed to tell the contractor to fell the trees on the basis of oral permission of the L-G, or if it independently took the decision to fell the trees," the bench questioned.

The contractor has been instructed to submit an affidavit by July 31, detailing who authorized the tree felling and the whereabouts of the wood from the cut trees.

In the recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed astonishment that authorities were unable to locate the timber from the felled trees at the site.

The Delhi government has filed an affidavit indicating that an order for the seizure of logs has been issued. However, the court questioned whether these logs were indeed from the trees that were cut down.

"So, the contractor will tell the location of logs of the felled trees. He will also state the location of transplanted trees," ordered the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court additionally directed the authorities to devise a plan for continuous surveillance to promptly report any illegal tree felling incidents.

Furthermore, the Court queried the Delhi government regarding its prior approval for the cutting of over 400 trees, noting that the order dated 14.02.2024 had been rescinded. It sought clarification on whether any officials from the Delhi government, including those from the forest department, were present during the tree-cutting activities.

"On the face of it, the Delhi government purported to permit felling of 422 trees. It is an admitted position that the tree officer never granted permission. Delhi government must take the blame for felling 422 trees without any statutory authority. Delhi government must state what steps it will take to compensate the environment. The stand of the Delhi government that the DDA misunderstood the notification will not absolve it from passing notification without statutory power. The Delhi government must come out with what action has been taken against the officer(s) responsible. It must state in oath how it will compensate the environment," the court stated.

Last week, the BJP alleged that Mr. Kejriwal personally approved the felling of trees in the Ridge area, prompting a rebuttal from AAP, which denounced the claim as misleading.

The Supreme Court has directed the Delhi government to ensure that the tree authority is appropriately constituted before the next hearing scheduled for July 31st.

The Supreme Court had previously issued a notice of criminal contempt against DDA vice-chairman Subhasish Panda for permitting extensive tree felling in the Satbari area of the southern Ridge to construct a road from Chhattarpur to South Asian University.