Read Time: 04 minutes

While acting on a letter petition filed by Senior Advocate N Hariharan alleging that a tree near his residence was being illegally cut, the Delhi High Court on Thursday questioned the manner in which the North Delhi Municipal Corporation had attempted to carry out the transplantation of a 60-year-old peepal tree at Inderpuri and directed Delhi’s forest department to examine the tree afresh to check whether it is dangerous or not.

The petitioner had sought direction to the NDMC, Delhi Police and the office of the deputy conservator of forest restraining them from cutting the tree.

While hearing the plea on October 28, Justice Rekha Palli, in the order, noted that irreparable harm will be caused not only to the environment but also to the residents of the locality if the tree was permitted to be cut without examining the plea.

On Thursday, NDMC submitted before Court that an application was filed with the forest department for permission for felling of the subject tree stating that it had became dangerous due to digging of nearby basement.

The Deputy Conservator of Forest told a bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva that the permission was not granted for felling of the tree but for transplantation.

He further submitted that the photographs showed that instead of taking steps for transplanting the tree, attempt was made to cut the tree and its branches which was not permitted. The Court was also informed that the said permission was valid only for 30 days from and the same had already lapsed.

Observing that there was no danger to the said tree of falling down as there is no tilt or sagging of the tree the Court ordered:

“...the building adjoining the tree has already been constructed and the basement has already been filled up, thus there prima facie does not appear to be any immediate danger, if any, of the tree falling any more however, it would be expedient for the Deputy Conservator of Forest to have the subject tree examined and to submit a report as to whether the said tree is dangerous or not.”

Cause Title: N Hariharan v. MCD And Ors