Won’t cut more trees, Chandigarh tells Punjab and Haryana High Court

Chandigarh, February 17

A day after axing of 100 eucalyptus trees outside the UT Secretariat came under judicial scanner, the authorities concerned today gave an undertaking not to cut more trees. Taking note of the undertaking, the Punjab and Haryana High Court made it clear the Secretary Forests would be held personally liable if the health of the trees was not assessed before proceeding with the exercise.

The developments before the Bench of Chief Justice Ravi Shanker Jha and Justice Arun Palli took place on a petition filed by Adityajit Singh Chadha, through senior advocate DS Patwalia with counsel Gauravjit Singh Patwalia and Lagan Kaur Sidhu. Among other things, the petition said it was “astonishing to believe” the entire belt of trees had cracks and not a single one was in a fit condition to survive”.

Referring to news reports, the petitioner contended the justification given by the authorities was that the trees were crack-ridden and posed a threat to the governmental building in the vicinity. A logical approach would have been to trim the trees for bringing them to a lower height to reduce the danger posed.

The petitioner added the respondents were now initiating axing of 100 more eucalyptus trees opposite the Punjab Police Headquarters in Sector 9, without conducting detailed investigations regarding their health.

“The petitioner has also submitted a representation dated February 16 against the activity of axing trees without conducting detailed investigations regarding their health. However, no response has been received from the authorities concerned,” the petitioner added.

It was further added the UT Department of Forests & Wildlife, had vide orders dated July 22, 2022, constituted a tree-felling committee. Its function was to receive applications for felling trees before conducting a detailed inspection to check their status and health and making specific recommendations along with detailed justification whether they were required to be pruned, pollarded, felled, transplanted or otherwise.

One of the questions of law before the Bench, the petitioner submitted, was whether “the axing of 100 eucalyptus trees without conducting a detailed inspection of the status and health of the same and without making specific recommendations qua the same is in teeth of the order dated July 22, 2022, by the Department of Forests & Wildlife, Chandigarh?”