"All have committed the mistake including the Lieutenant Governor. Sorry state of affairs," the top court bench said.
The Supreme Court on Friday came down heavily on Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena over his role in the tree felling in the ridge area. It directed the DDA to inform it whether the order to cut was passed on LG's oral permission or was it the agency's independent decision.
An apex court bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing suo moto contempt proceedings against Subhasish Panda, the vice chairman of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), over alleged cutting of 1,100 trees in the ridge forest for a road widening project.
The bench observed that there was a complete non-application of mind by Saxena in granting permission for the felling of trees, adding that it should have been apprised of his directions on the very first day of the hearing.
"What troubles us is that everybody has committed a mistake. First day, everybody should have come to the court and said there is a mistake by us. But cover up goes on and on," the top court said.
It said that the truth came out only after four to five orders, that too in the form of DDA officer's affidavit. "All have committed the mistake including the Lieutenant Governor. Sorry state of affairs," the bench said.
The role of LG VK Saxena was realised when the Attorney General R Venkataramani appeared by himself, saying that it was "sufficient indication".
The top court also slammed the Delhi government, saying that it was equally at fault in chopping of trees in the ridge area, adding that it must take the blame of illegally granting the permission of felling 422 trees.
The Aam Aadmi Party-led government has been asked to figure out a mechanism to compensate this illegal felling of trees.
After inspecting the two affidavits filed by the DDA vice chairman, the SC bench said prima facie, it appeared that there was reluctance on the part of all concerned parties to bring on record as to what exactly happened during Saxena's visit to the site on February 3, 2024, when the oral order was given for chopping the trees.
"It appears that LG stated that tree felling under the tree act has already been permitted on the basis of approval granted by him and therefore DDA should be informed about approval," the SC said.
The apex court bench said that the it is the "most unfortunate" part of this incident that none of the senior officials of the state government present at the site highlighted the need for a court permission for the felling of trees or that of a tree officer for chopping trees in other areas.
The top court has issued a notice to the contractor, seeking an explanation as to on whose direction was the felling of trees done and asked to be told about the location of the felled trees.
It also directed the state government to file an affidavit stating on whose order of seizure of logs has been passed. "The authorities shall come with a plan to keep constant surveillance so that instances of illegal tree felling are brought to the notice of the authorities immediately," the top court said.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had issued a notice of criminal contempt against DDA vice chairman Subhasish panda for allowing a large-scale cutting of trees in the southern Ridge's Satbari area to construct a road from Chhattarpur to South Asian University.
The AAP government said that the forest department clarified it to the Supreme Court that no permission had been granted to the DDA for felling any tree.
In a statement, the Arvind Kejriwal-led government said that the apex court, while hearing a contempt proceeding regarding the felling of trees in the Ridge area, expressed shock over the "silence" of senior officers in the matter.
"It is interesting to know the Forest Department did make it very clear in the Supreme Court that no permission has been granted for felling any tree by the DDA. Even concerning the felling of 422 trees, no permission was granted," the Delhi government said.
It said that it was only the exemption notification of LG Saxena, dated February 14, 2024, which was published and it was not a permission to fell trees. The state government said that the permission was granted under section 9 of the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act.
"However, this notification (exemption notification) was published under Section 24 of the Preservation of Tree Act. Therefore, it is very clear and the court accepted the fact that there was no permission even for 422 trees which was granted by the Delhi government," it said.
(With PTI inputs)