Cover-up on, DDA Vice Chairman must come clean if L-G ordered tree felling: Supreme Court

Justice Oka said, “After issuing notice also, cover-up goes on. So, unless we take a strong view, the signal will not go… And the cover-up goes on till today, unfortunately.”

He said the court’s endeavour was not to send anyone to jail but to know true facts so that remedial measures for the loss of trees could be taken.

“We have issued a contempt notice to the Vice Chairman, but that does not mean we want to send him to jail. But at the same time, he must come clean before the court about who issued directions for felling of trees. If he does that, he will be rendering great service to the environment and to the justice delivery system. He must remember,” he said.

“Speaking for myself, I have hardly sent anyone to jail under the Contempt of Courts Act… But still, he has to clear our doubt that some cover-up is going on. He must come very clean. If the highest authority has done something wrong, there is nothing wrong if it is told to the court. Ultimately, we are here to take remedial measures. We are not going to run with a hammer in our hands against all authorities, but truth must come before the court. That is why we are spending so much time,” Justice Oka said.

On January 24, the bench had asked the DDA Vice Chairman to inform it whether the Lt Governor had visited the site and directed cutting of trees. The bench cited the report of an Enquiry Committee set up by DDA to investigate who ordered the tree felling. It said emails sent purportedly by the executive engineer to the contractor showed that the Lt Governor had given the order but the engineer denied sending the emails.

On Wednesday, Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the Vice Chairman, told the bench that officials were still trying to find the records and needed more time.

But this did not convince the court which said the request for more time did not appear bona fide. “Learned senior counsel representing DDA… states that he could not obtain information whether the record relating to site visit of the Honourable LG on February 3, 2024 is available with DDA. Learned Senior counsel seeks time. We don’t think that the request for time to find out such simple information is bona fide,” the bench said.

While the court has sought to know whether the Lt Governor visited the site of the tree felling and directed the clearing, the DDA has maintained that his visit on February 3 was to the hospital and not the site of the tree clearing.

Singh told the bench that DDA Member Engineering Ashik Kumar Gupta was also present during the February 3 visit by the Lt Governor.

The bench directed Gupta to “file a detailed affidavit on exactly what transpired during the visit of Honourable LG on February 3. He may also state whether any suggestions/directions were issued by Honourable LG.” It made clear that Gupta “will file his affidavit not in his capacity as officer of DDA, but in his capacity as officer of this court”.

To the bench remark that there should have been disclosure about the February 3 visit of the LG, Singh said “there was no effort to not say that the LG had visited the site of the hospital.”

Justice Oka asked, “Then why did the enquiry committee not inquire about it? When material comes on record, three emails that LG had visited and ordered cutting of trees, why was the inquiry not made by the enquiry committee whether LG in fact visited? Because the scope of enquiry was who ordered the cutting of the trees. The enquiry committee doesn’t want to look into that… Or the object of the committee is only to save the higher ups? And shift blame on some executive engineer, deputy engineer.”

The bench also issued contempt notice to the Delhi government through the Principal Secretary, Forest and Environment Department for clearing the felling of 422 trees while the authority concerned for this was the Tree Officer under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994. The bench wondered how the Delhi government could “usurp” the powers of the Tree Officer under the 1994 Act.

“Fantastic. Delhi government usurps the powers of the Tree Authority. Fantastic… This is completely illegal,” Justice Oka said on the Delhi Forest Department clearance for tree clearing.

“Under the 1994 Act, permission is required… from the Tree Officer appointed by the government… The state government had no authority to grant permission for felling and transplantation of 422 trees… The state government will have to answer many questions, including the question how the government could usurp the powers of the Tree Officer under Section 9 of 1994 Act by purportedly granting permission while exercising power under Section 29 of the 1994 Act. In fact, the very notification granting exemption indicates that exemption from applicability of Section 9 was not granted to DDA. Therefore, the Delhi government will have to explain how such gross illegality has been committed,” the bench said.

It directed the Tree Officer to “immediately initiate action under the… 1994 Act by taking seizure of the felled trees and parts thereof.” It also asked DDA to “immediately locate the felled trees or parts thereof and communicate the said information to the Tree Officer within a period of one week from today”.