National Green Tribunal
Satya Narayan Singh vs Forest Department Firozabad on 28 May, 2024
Item No.02 (Court No. 2)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(Through Physical Hearing with Hybrid VC Option)
Original Application No.246/2023
1. Satya Narayan Singh,
Village Alhadadpur,
District Firozabad,
Uttar Pradesh:-283203.
Mobile no:- 9719905212.
Email Id:- [email protected]. ...Applicant
Versus
1. Forest Department, Firozabad,
Village and Post Alahadadpur,
District Firozabad,
Uttar Pradesh:-283203.
Email Id. [email protected].
...Respondents
2. Ministry of Environment, Forest
and Climate Change,
Indira Paryawaran Bhawan,
New Delhi:-110003.
Email Id. [email protected].
3. Union of India,
PMO's Office Parliament Street,
New Delhi:- 110001.
Email Id. [email protected].
4. Through Principal Secretary Environment
601, Baapu Bhawan, Secretarial,
Vidhan Sabha Marg, Uttar Pradesh.
Lucknow:- 226001.
Email Id. [email protected]
5. State of Uttar Pradesh,
Suchna Bhawan, Park Road,
Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow:-226001.
Email id. [email protected].
6. Department of Environment, U.P,
Lal Bahadur Shastri Bhawan,
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh
Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-2-
Secretariat, Uttar Pradesh,
Lucknow:-26001.
Email Id. [email protected].
7. DFO, Firozabad,
Firozabad, Uttarpradesh,
Firozabad:-283203.
Email Id. [email protected].
Counsel for Applicant:
Applicant in person.
PRESENT:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL EXPERT
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Judgment Reserved on:- 13.12.2023
Judgment pronounced on :- 28.05.2024
Application under the provisions of the National Green Tribunal Act,
2010.
JUDGMENT
PRONOUNCED BY: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JM
1. The applicant has filed the present application under the provisions of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 complaining about cutting of 14 Neem Trees by Mr. Rajkishore, Ram Singh and Man Singh illegally in violation of order dated 08.05.2015 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P (c) no. 13381/1984 titled as M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India and Others and directions issued by this Tribunal and also the environmental norms.
2. The relevant part of the letter petition enumerating grievances of the applicant is reproduced as follows:-
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-3-"िवषय - सरकारी जमीन गाटा सं ा 793 तथा िववािदत जमीन गाटा सं ा 794 पर समूह म खड़े 14 हरे नीम के वृ ों को (जोिक काले रं ग के वासी पि यों का आवास थे) काट दे ने के संबंध म महोदय, िनवेदन यह है िक, ाम सभा अलहदादपुर, थाना मटसेना, िजला िफरोजाबाद उ र- दे श म गाटा सं ा 794 तथा गाटा सं ा 793 सरकारी जमीन पर सन् 2000 से भी काफी पहले से 14 हरे नीम के पेड़ खड़े ए थे जो ाम सभा अलहदादपुर के िलए पयावरण तथा काले रं ग के वासी पि यों को शरण / आवास दे ते थे। गाँ व के ही राजिकशोर, राम िसंह, मानिसंह ने नीम के पेड़ों को काटने का यास िकया था िजसकी िशकायत वन िवभाग एवं िजला अिधकारी िफरोजाबाद से की गई तो पेड़ों को कटने से बचा िलया गया। त ात् राजिकशोर आिद ने वन िवभाग के अिधका रयों को गुमराह कर गलत व झूठे आधारों पर पेड़ काटने की अनुमित वन िवभाग से प ां क 2048 / पाटन िदनां क - 30/03/2016 को ली। पता चलने पर इन सुंदर हरे नीम के वृ ों को काटने की अवैध अनुमित व कटान की माननीय मु मं ी उ र दे श को िशकायत की गई। आयु आगरा म ल, आगरा के प सं ा 3607 / िशकायत िलिपक 30 अ ैल 2016 के आदे श पर िजला अिधकारी िफरोजाबाद ने पल सं ा 1395 / लोकवाजी संदभ 27 जू न 2016 के अपने आदे श म अलहदादपुर को T.T.2 (ताज टे पेिजयम जोन) 10400 वग िकमी. म फैले ए के अंदर मानते ए िबना सव ायालय, नई िद ी की अनुमित के इन पेड़ों को काटने पर पूण प से ितबंध लगा िदया था, ोंिक T.T.2 े म सव ायालय के िनदशानुसार सव ायालय के आदे श के िबना कोई भी पेड़ काटा नहीं जाएगा।
गाटा सं ा 794 को राजिकशोर आिद से िवमल िकशोर, िव नाथ, वीनेश पु गण च भान िसंह ने कृय कर िलया था तथा िदनां क 23/02/023 को िवमल कुमार, िव नाथ, वीनेश पु गण च मान िसंह ने हरे नीम के सभी 14 थ पेड़ों को काट िदया इसकी िशकायत थाना मटसेना हलका इं चाज को उनके मोबाइल न र 9058350098 पर दी गई तथा हे लाइन न र 112 पर िशकायत की तो 917311150667 न र पर स क आ त ात् पुिलस ने आकर लकड़ी काटने बाले ठे केदार व िवमल कुमार व वीनेश को मौके से िगर ार िकया तथा बाद म िबना कोई कानूनी कायवाही अमल म लाए छोड़ िदया। तथा वन िवभाग के अिधकारी से मोबाइल न र 9720868080 पर िशकायत की तो जाँ च के िलए आए। इसके बाद DFO िफरोजाबाद के ऑिफस म जाकर िल खत म िशकायत की ले िकन िनराशा की बात यह है िक पयावरण का िवनाश करने म भूिमका िनभाने वाले उ लोगों के खलाफ अब तक कोई क़ानूनी कायवाही अमल म नहीं लाई गई है ।
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh
Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-4-
महोदय जो हरे नीम के 14 थ वृ काटे गए है इन पर दशकों से
ितवष काले रं ग के वासी प ी आते ह अपने घौंसले िनिमत कर अपनी जनन ि या संप करते है तथा ब ों को साथ ले कर वे जु लाई माह म वापस चले जाते है उ लोगों ने इन 14 थ हरे नीम के वृ ों को काटकर गाँ व के पा र थितकी तं को न करने का संगीन काय िकया है महोदय ाम अलहदादपुर वन िवभाग के े से अपनी सीमा साझा करता है तथा गाँ व म हरे थ वृ ों का काटन िदन- ितिदन िकया जा रहा है तथा ाम सभा की जमीन (उदाहरण के िलए गाटा सं ा 793) पर लोगों ने अवैध क े कर रखे है तथा गाँ व म वनो-मूलन तथा अवैध खनन मािफयाओं ारा िकया जा रहा है बार-बार िशकायत करने पर भी शासन ारा िकसी के खलाफ अभी तक, कोई कठोर कानूनी कायवाही अमल म नहीं लाई गई है गाँ व म उिचत वृ ारोपण भी नहीं िकया जा रहा है तथा उ तरीके से वृ ों को काटने से गाँ व की ह रयाली ख हो रही है तथा गाँ व म पयावरणीय दशाएँ संकट म है व नकारा क प से लोगों व ताकृितक साधनों को भािवत कर रही है महोदय पेड़ों के लगातार कटान से गाँ व का भौमजल र लगभग 300 फीट गहराई पर प ँ च गया है जो गाँ व के 'डाक ए रया' बनने के संकेत है तथा गाँ व म दू षण का र अपने चरम र की ओर लगातार अ सर है तथा इसी का कारण है िक गाँ व के लोग अ थमा जै से कई अ रोगों के िशकार होते जा रहे ह महोदय गाँ व की सड़क िकनारे 20 वष पहले वृ ारोपण िकया गया था उन वृ ों को काटकाट कर भी असामािजक त सरीखे लोगों ने उस सड़क पर अित मण कर अपने खेतों की जमीनों म िमला िलया है अतः महोदय जी से िनवेदन है िक िदनां क 25/02/023 को िवमल कुमार, िव नाथ एवं वीनेश पु गण च भान िसंह िनवासी अलहदादपुर ने उ े खत 14 हरे व थ नीम के वृ ों को काटकर / न कर गाँ व के सम िनवािसयों के पयावरण के उस अिधकार को छीनने का यास िकया है जो संिवधान के अनु े द-21 के तहत िमली तं ता म उ ग रमापूण जीवन जीने के मूल अिधकार के अंतगत िमलता है तथा माननीय सव ायलय के उस आदे श का उ ंघन है िजसम माननीय सव ायालय ने T.T.2 े म िबना सव ायालय के वृ ों को काटने को ितबंिधत िकया था।
महोदय जी उ लोगों तथा इनके साथ इस काय म िल अ के खलाफ उिचत कठोर कानूनी कायवाही अमल म लाने की कृपा करे िजससे भिव म और कोई वृ ों को अवैध प से काटने का दु ाहस न कर सके तथा गाँ व का पयावरण व पा र थितकी तं बेहतर हो सके तथा गाँ व दू षण मु बन सके। इस महान काय के िलए महोदय जी की महान कृपा होगी।"
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-5-
3. Vide order dated 29.03.2023 this Tribunal sought a report from the Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad. The relevant part of the order is reproduced below:-
"3. In view of the averments made in the application, we consider it appropriate to seek a report from the Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad. Accordingly, the Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad is directed to undertake visit to the site, look into the grievances of the applicant, verify the factual position and submit his report within one month by e-mail at judicial- [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Supported PDF and not in the form of Image PDF."
4. In compliance thereof Mr. Vikash Nayak, DFO, Social Forestry Division, Firozabad has filed his report vide email dated 29.04.2023. The relevant part of the report is reproduced hereunder:-
"Compliance Report on Order of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal in Original Application No. 246/2023 (Satya Narayan Singh Versus Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors) X X X Subject: Compliance Report on Order of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal in Original Application No. 246/2023 (Satya Narayan Singh Versus Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.) In compliance of the Order of Hon'ble National Green tribunal in original application no. 246/2023 (Satya Narayan Singh Versus Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.), Undersigned has undertaken the visit of site, looked into the grievances of the applicant and verified the factual position. The compliance report is as follows.
Firstly, undersigned has examined the documents of Range office of Firozabad and Divisional Forest office related to the present case. Upon examination it is found that from the same site 02 trees of Neem (Azadirachta indica) were illegally felled on 19/01/2015 by Raj Kishore S/O Bharat Singh and Ram Singh S/O Bharat Singh, Village Alhadadpur, District Firozabad and forest case was booked vide Range case no.06/Firozabad/2014-2015 on 19.01.2015 and action has been taken. The case is under consideration in Hon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate court, Firozabad. In the meantime, on 13/04/2017 the land ownership was transferred from the family of Raj Kishore S/O Bharat Singh, Village Alhadadpur, District Firozabad to the family of Veenesh Kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh, village Alhadadpur, District Firozabad and in the sale deed (Bainama), it is clearly mentioned that 13 Neem trees were also present on the land (Annexure-1).
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.-6-
In the present matter on 27/02/2023, Satya Narayan Singh, Village Alhadadpur, District Firozabad gave a complaint to the undersigned. Immediately Range Forest officer, Firozabad was directed for prompt action. Forest officials have found that 03 Neem trees were illegally felled and the stumps of 03 trees were found on the ground. Consequently, the concerned Range Forest Office, Firozabad has booked the prima facie Range case no.16/Firozabad/2022-2023 against Veenesh Kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh, village Sauramgadhi (Alhadadpur),Matsena, District Firozabad under the violation of Sec 4/10 of Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 and the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order dated 08.05.2015 passed in W.P. No.13381/1984 M.C.Mehta Vs Union of India & Ors (Annexure-2).
Investigating officer in his report has highlighted that 03 Neem trees were illegally felled on 27/02/2023 by Veenesh Kumar and 09 trees were illegally felled in earlier years. The wood was consumed by Veenesh kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh in last years without informing the forest department. He has violated the provisions of the Sec 4/10, Sec 4(B) of Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act 1976, Section 3/28 of Uttar Pradesh Transit of Timber and Forest Produce Rules,1978 along with the norms and guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order dated 08.05.2015 passed in W.P. No. 13381/1984 M.C.Mehta Vs Union of India & Ors. Subsequently, on 20/04/2023 a complaint has been filed before the Hon'ble court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in this matter. The current matter for felling 12 trees is under consideration in the Hon'ble CJM court (Annexure-3).
In the compliance of the order the undersigned has heard the grievances of applicant through letter no.3455/35-3 dated 20/04/2023, Office of Divisional director, Social Forestry Division, Firozabad on 21/04/2023(Annexure-4). In the statement of the applicant which he has given in his handwriting in front of the undersigned, he has raised the matter of disputed land of Gatta no. 793 and 794 apart from the illegal felling of 14 trees. Applicant has been apprised about the action taken by Forest department on the illegal felling of 14 tress. Applicant has also been informed regarding the disputed land that he should approach Revenue Department, the competent authority to solve the land matter. Regarding the disputed land Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Firozabad has been informed through letter no. 3520/35-3 dated 26/04/2023, Office of Divisional Director, Social Forestry Division, Firozabad (Annexure-5).
On 23/04/2023 undersigned has inspected the site of illegal felling, Gatta no.793/794 (Annexure-6). On the inspection of site, the Owner of Gatta no. 794, Veenesh kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh, Village Sauramgadhi (Alhadadpur), Thana Matsena, District Firozabad has appeared and inspection was done regarding the illegal felling by the Veenesh kumar. During inspection 03 stumps of illegally felled trees of Neem were found on the site and no other stump of remaining trees were found on the site. The Veenesh kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh has given his statement on affidavit (Annexure-7). In which he has admitted that 09 trees had got fallen in 2018, 2019, 2020 O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.-7-
and 2021 due to waterlogging and storm. The wood of the 09 trees was used by him. It appears that stumps of the 09 trees have been removed by the land owner to hide this illegal felling. Thus, from the above facts and circumstances it is found that total 14 Neem trees had been illegally felled which is summarised as follows-
(a) 02 Trees had been felled by Sh. Raj Kishore S/O Bharat Singh and Ram Singh S/O Bharat Singh, for which forest case was booked vide Range case no.06/Firozabad/2014-2015 on 19.01.2015.
(b) 09 Trees had been felled illegally by Veenesh kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh, which he has shown that they have fallen due to waterlogging and storm in earlier years. But as per the Section 4(b) and Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976, Veenesh Kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh should have taken the permission or intimated to Forest Department to dispose the fallen trees. The investigating officer in the Range case no.16/Firozabad/2022-2023 has found that these 09 trees have been illegally felled by Veenesh Kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh and during site inspection it was found that he had also removed the stumps of these 09 trees to hide the illegal felling.
(c) 03 Trees had been illegally felled by Veenesh Kumar S/O Chandrabhan Singh on 27/02/2023 against which Range case no.16/Firozabad/2022-2023 was booked and stumps were also found on the site.
(d) It is submitted that Forest Department has taken prompt action and violations have been registered under the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act,1976, Uttar Pradesh Transit of Timber and other Forest Produce, Rules 1978 and guidelines of Hon'ble Supreme court's order dated 08.05.2015 passed in W.P No. 13381/1984 M.C.Mehta Vs Union of India & Ors.
(e) It is humbly submitted to Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Principal bench, New Delhi to kindly consider and take on record the compliance report."
5. A perusal of the report shows that 02 trees of Neem (Azadirachta indica) were illegally felled on 19.01.2015 by Raj Kishore and Ram Singh. On 13.04.2017 land ownership was transferred by Raj Kishore and Ram Singh and others in favour of Sanju Devi wife of Veenesh Kumar and others vide sale deed dated 13.04.2017 in which 13 Neem trees were mentioned to be standing on the land sold. 03 Neem trees were illegally felled on 27/02/2023 by Veenesh Kumar and 09 trees were illegally felled in earlier years.
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-8-
6. Forest Range case no. 06/Firozabad/2014-2015 was booked against Raj Kishore and Ram Singh and Forest Range Case no. 16/Firozabad/2022-2023 was booked against Veenesh Kumar and complaints were filed against them in the Court of Hon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Firozabad which are under consideration.
7. A reference to the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 is essential for proceeding further.
8. The Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 was enacted to provide for regulation of felling of trees and replanting of trees in Uttar Pradesh. Section 2 of the Act excludes applicability of the Act to trees situated in reserved and protected forests; trees situated in a forest or forest land in respect of which any notification under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 as amended in its application to Uttar Pradesh is in force and trees situated in Cantonment areas. It follows by necessary implication that the Act applies to trees in all other areas.
9. Section 3(xi) defines that "Tree" means any woody plant whose branches spring from and are supported upon a trunk or body and whose trunk or body is not less than five centimeter in diameter at height of thirty centimeters from the ground level and is not less than one meter in height from the ground level, and the expressions ''timber trees'' and ''fruit trees'' means respectively the trees of the species specified in Schedule I and Schedule II respectively. The State Government is empowered by the proviso to the same to add to or modify the Schedules by notifications. Felling a tree with its cognate expressions, means cutting girdling, lopping, pollarding or damaging a tree in any other manner.
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-9-
10. Section 4 provides that no person shall fell any tree standing on any land, whether included in a holding or not and cut, remove or otherwise dispose of any tree other than a tree which is completely dead and has fallen without the aid of human agency on any such land except as provided in the Act or the rules made there under. Section 5 lays down the procedure for grant of permission to fell and remove trees.
11. Section 7 places every person, to whom permission has been granted under the Act to fell, cut, remove or dispose of any tree to plant and tend two trees in place of every tree in the area, from where such tree has been felled, cut, removed or disposed of by him under such permission. Proviso to Section 7 empowers the competent authority to permit lesser number of trees to be planted, or trees to be planted in any different area, or exempt any person from the obligation to plant or tend any tree for reasons to be recorded in writing. Section 8 empowers the Divisional Forest Officer to direct plantation in blank area specified in the direction. Section 9 (1) provides for implementation of directions given under Sections 7 and 8 and mandates the concerned person directed to plant the trees in accordance with such direction in the next following rainy season or within such extended time as the Divisional Forest Officer concerned may allow and in case of default by such person the Divisional Forest Officer is empowered by Section 9 (2) to cause trees to be planted and recover the cost of plantation from such person in the prescribed manner.
12. Section 10 provides the penalty for felling or removal of trees in contravention of Section 4. Section 13 confers power to arrest without warrant, Section 14 confers power to seize, Section 12 empowers forfeiture of timber and Section 15 confers power to compound offences.
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-10-
13. Section 10 which, provides the penalty for felling or removal of trees in contravention of Section 4, reads as under:
"10. Penalty for felling or removal of trees in contravention of Section 4 - Whoever fells or causes to be felled any standing tree, or cuts, removes or otherwise disposes of any fallen tree, in contravention of the provisions of Section 4, or contravens any condition of any permission granted under this Act, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both."
14. Section 15 which confers power to compound offences reads as under:-
"15. Power to compound offences.
(1)The State Government may by notification authorise any officers to accept any person against whom there is reason to believe that he has committed offence under this Act in respect of any tree other than a tree situated in a forest, grove or public premises, such sum of money not exceeding Rs. 5,000 by way of composition for the offence which such person is suspected to have committed.
(2)On the payment of such sum of money to any such officer, the suspected person if in custody shall be released and no further proceedings under this Act shall be taken against such person and notwithstanding anything contained in Section 14, such officer may on payment of such amount, not exceeding five thousand rupees as he may in the circumstances of the case think fit, release the property seized under this Act."
15. It is evident from a reading of Sections 10 and 15 that while the Act imposes the obligation to plant two trees for one tree cut on persons seeking permission to cut trees and in case of default by him, empowers the Divisional Forest Officer to cause trees to be planted and recover the cost of plantation from such person in the prescribed manner but the Act does not impose any such obligation on persons cutting tree without such permission as part of the penalty under Section 10 or composition under Section 15. The meager amount of fine of Rs. 1,000/- under O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-11-Section 10 will be insufficient to meet the cost of compensatory plantation. Section 10 does not confer any power to award any compensation for compensatory plantation. Section 15 does not make any provisions for utilization of the amount of composition fee for compensatory plantation. The criminal remedies embodied by these penal provisions cannot bar the civil remedy of compensatory plantation.
16. There appears to no valid reason as to why the person illegally cutting trees be also not placed under the same obligation under civil remedy to plant two trees against one tree cut and liability to pay expenses for planting the trees in case of default by him. We recommend to Government of Uttar Pradesh to suitably amend Section 7, 10 and 15 of the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 in the interest of protection of trees and enhancing green cover.
17. It may be added here that this Tribunal has generally insisted on plantation of 10 trees in lieu of 1 tree cut. Recently, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Bindu Kapurea Vs. Subhasish Panda, Contempt Petition (Civil) Diary No (S). 21171/2024 in W.P. (c) No. 4677/1985 (IA No. 117930/2024- Appropriate Orders/Directions and IA No. 111340/2024-Ex-Parte Ad-Interim Relief) has directed vide order dated 16.05.2024 plantation of 100 trees in lieu of 1 tree cut. However, in the absence of any challenge before us to the provision in the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 for plantation of 2 trees in lieu of 1 tree cut, we consider it unnecessary and improper to go into the question as to any mandatory requirement of planting more than 2 trees in lieu of 1 tree cut and leave the same open for consideration in appropriate case.
18. In the present case the environmental damage caused by illegal cutting of 14 neem trees is not remediated by mere prosecution of the O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-12-violators and requires remediation by compensatory plantation. The Divisional Forest Officer has no power under the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 to direct such compensatory plantation and any amendment of the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act, 1976 is likely to take time.
19. Section 14 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (NGT Act) confers on this Tribunal jurisdiction over all civil cases where a substantial question relating to environment (including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment), is involved and such question arises out of the implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule I. and to hear the disputes arising from such questions and settle such disputes and pass order thereon.
20. Section 15 of the NGT Act empowers this Tribunal to provide relief and compensation to the victims of pollution and other environmental damage arising under the enactments specified in the Schedule I (including accident occurring while handling any hazardous substance); for restitution of property damaged; and for restitution of the environment for such area or areas, as this Tribunal thinks fit.
21. The power conferred on this Tribunal Section 33 of the provides that provisions of the NGT Act, shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act.
22. Environmental damage caused by widely prevalent mischief of illegal cutting of trees needs to be remediated by issuance of appropriate directions for compensatory plantation for restitution of environment in the area from which trees are illegally cut.
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-13-
23. Accordingly, in exercise of powers under Sections 14 and 15 read with Section 33 of the NGT Act the following direction is issued subject to suitable amendment of the Uttar Pradesh Tree Protection Act,1976 that every person found to have illegally felled, cut, removed or disposed of any tree shall be bound to plant and tend for 05 years two trees in place of every tree in the area, from where such tree has been felled, cut, removed or disposed by him in the next following rainy season within his land in the vicinity or within such extended time and at such place as the Divisional Forest Officer concerned may allow and in case of default by such person the Divisional Forest Officer shall be entitled to cause trees to be planted and recover the cost of plantation from such person as arrears of land revenue in accordance with law.
24. In view of the above present Original Application is disposed of with direction to the Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad to issue notices to above mentioned persons requiring them to carry out compensatory plantation as directed by this Tribunal in the next following rainy season within their land in the vicinity or within such extended time and at such place as the Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad may allow and in case of default by them to cause trees to be planted and recover the cost of plantation from such person as arrears of land revenue in accordance with law and file his Action Taken Report.
25. Action Taken Report be filed by Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad within six months before the learned Registrar General, National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi who may, if necessary, put up the matter before the Bench for further directions.
O. A. No. 246/2023 Satya Narayan Singh Vs. Forest Department, Firozabad & Ors.
-14-
26. A copy of this order be forwarded by email to the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh and the Divisional Forest Officer, Firozabad for requisite compliance.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM May 28th, 2024 AG