The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, called for a clear resolution of discrepancies in statements regarding when Delhi Lieutenant Governor V.K. Saxena and the former Vice-Chairperson of Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Subhasish Panda, were made aware of tree felling activities in Delhi’s Ridge area. During a session on Thursday, the court directed both officials to file affidavits detailing the exact dates they learned about these activities.
The issue stems from allegations that around 1,100 trees were illegally felled in February as part of a road widening project intended to improve access to the Central Armed Police Forces Institute of Medical Sciences. According to the Supreme Court’s directives, both Saxena and Panda must produce original records and a comprehensive Forest Survey of India report to the court by next week.
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners, argued that there were significant inconsistencies between the LG’s affidavit and actual records. According to Sankaranarayanan, while LG Saxena claimed to have been informed on June 10, evidence suggests he was aware as early as April. In contrast, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, representing LG Saxena, insisted that his client was only formally notified of the tree felling dates on June 10, and any prior knowledge did not include specifics about the commencement of activities.
The court highlighted that initial tree felling began around February 16, 2024, raising questions about who authorized the felling and why the necessary permissions were seemingly disregarded. This issue has been exacerbated by Saxena’s admission in his affidavit that he visited the site in February and was informed that permission from the competent authority was pending, yet he did not realize that the court’s permission was also required.
The bench expressed concern over these revelations and noted that further clarification was necessary to understand the timeline of events fully. The hearing has been adjourned to November 5, where more detailed affidavits are expected to shed light on these discrepancies.
