The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) on Tuesday questioned the Punjab government’s move of planting compensatory trees in Mullanpur and Chandigarh University, 20 kilometers away from the Sohana vicinity where trees had been cut.
The HC bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sanjiv Berry observed that efforts should have been made for planting the compensatory trees in areas where the trees are being felled.
The court was hearing a clutch of petitions – one seeking the quashing of a Mohali administration decision to cut 251 trees for building three roundabouts near Gurdwara Singh Shaheedan, Sector 78/79, and near CP-67 mall, and another opposing tree cutting for a shopping mall. It was in these proceedings that the HC on December 24 stayed the felling of trees across Punjab, modified later for certain categories of work such as those undertaken by the National Highways Authority of India.
The bench also questioned whether alternatives such as building of underpasses was considered to avoid large-scale tree felling at the junctions, where road widening has been proposed by Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA).
Earlier, the state’s counsel had submitted that around 2,600 trees are proposed to be planted at Chandigarh University, as part of compensatory afforestation for the two projects. Further, plantation is to be done in Mullanpur forest area.
In the case of the university, the court questioned the feasibility of the proposal and asked whether the university actually had sufficient land for such large-scale plantation.
While the state authorities had submitted that the university had about 400 acres, the petitioners had questioned the move alleging that a private university land cannot be used for afforestation by the authorities as only public land is to be used as per policy. Further it was also submitted by the petitioners that a no-objection certificate from the varsity is also not a part of the record.
As of afforestation in Mullanpur forest area, the government counsel had told the court that the area has been earmarked in forest area as GMADA failed to give public land for the same. Forest department is to plant trees, wherever the area is provided under the Green Punjab Mission.
The petitioners on the other hand had submitted that planting of trees on existing forest land as compensatory afforestation should not be permitted. The objective of the policy is to increase tree cover in non-forest and urban public areas, not merely densify forests that are already protected, they argued.
The court orally observed that compensatory afforestation should preferably be carried out on public land, where the state could exercise effective control. Also, it should be in the areas from where trees are being removed. To examine the necessity of cutting of trees for commercial sites and roundabouts, the court had appointed a lawyers group as commissioners, who have submitted their reports for both the sites. The court said that it would pass an appropriate order after going through these reports.
www.hindustantimes.com
#compensatory #trees #planted #removal #spots #questions #Punjab
