Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

National Green Tribunal

Rajan vs Govt. Of N.C.T. Of Delhi on 4 March, 2024

Item No. 05                                                  Court No. 1

               BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
                   PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

                       Original Application No. 218/2024

Rajan                                                            Applicant
                                   Versus

Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors.                               Respondent(s)


Date of hearing:     04.03.2024

CORAM:        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON
              HON'BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER
              HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

Applicant:    Mr. Vivek Luthra, Advocate



                                     ORDER

1. In this original application, Applicant has come up with the grievance that Respondent No. 5 has uprooted/cut a full-fledged grown tree which was standing in the park opposite to DDA Market No. 3, Y Block, Mangol Puri, Ward No. 42, Delhi. The further grievance is that though Applicant had sent letter dated 04.08.2023 to the Tree Officer, DCF but no action has been taken.

2. Having heard learned Counsel for the Applicant, we find that the responsibility lies with the Tree Officer under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994. The Act provides for appointment of Tree Officer under Section 5 of the Act and Section 7 of the Act imposes a duty on the tree authority to preserve all trees within its jurisdiction. Section 9 of the Act provides for procedure for obtaining permission to fell, cut, remove or dispose of trees and Section 10 imposes an obligation to plant trees on the person who was granted permission under the Act to fell or dispose of any tree. The Tree Officer has been entrusted with the power to seize property, if he finds that an offence under the Act is committed and he 1 has also the power of forfeiture and arrest without warrant. Section 24 of the Act provides for the penalty. In terms of Rule 12 of the Delhi Preservation of Trees Rules, 1996, a valuation report of forfeited property is required to be prepared by the Tree Officer. Hence, we are of the view that the Tree Officer should have duly considered the complaint which was made by the Applicant. We are of the view that the issue needs to be examined at the first instance by Respondent No. 3.

3. Hence, we dispose of the OA directing the Respondent No. 3 to ensure that competent Tree Officer submits action taken report before the Member Secretary, DPCC within four weeks, who on receipt of the report will do the needful in accordance with law within eight weeks and will submit action taken report before the Registrar General of the Tribunal within four months by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. If found necessary, the matter will be listed before the bench for consideration.

4. The OA is accordingly disposed of.

5. A copy of this order be forwarded to Respondent No. 3 and Member Secretary, DPCC by e-mail for compliance.

Prakash Shrivastava, CP Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM March 04, 2024 Original Application No. 218/2024 DV 2