Delhi Ridge Functions As The Lungs Of The City: Supreme Court Disposes Of Contempt Proceedings In Unauthorised Tree Felling In The Delhi Ridge

The Court reiterated that the Delhi Ridge functions as the “lungs of the city,” while issuing directions for “urgent and time-bound remedial measures” to be undertaken by the DDA in coordination with the GNCTD.

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh remarked that “it must be emphasised that while the misadventure undertaken by the errant officials of the DDA was in clear and flagrant contravention of this Court’s orders, the underlying objective—namely, to facilitate improved access through broader approach roads for CAPFIMS and other public institutions—appears, does not seem to be in bad faith and certainly not to defy the authority of this Court. The Court is conscious of the distinction between mala fide abuse of power and genuine administrative misjudgement, and we are inclined to deem that the present instance falls within the latter category.”

Senior Advocates Maninder Singh, Vikas Singh, Aditya Sondhi, Anupam Lal Das, and Sanjay Jain, along with the Additional Solicitor General of India Aishwarya Bhati appeared on behalf of the DDA and the GNCTD.

Brief Facts

The Petition was filed invoking Article 129 of the Constitution, Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and Rule 3(c) of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975, praying for the initiation of contempt proceedings against the Respondents for wilful disobedience of the Court's Order in MC Mehta v. Union of India.

In furtherance of directions in M.C. Mehta (supra), the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi constituted the Ridge Management Board (RMB) entrusting it with the responsibility of protecting and restoring the Delhi Ridge Forest.

The 1996 Order of the Apex Court in MC Mehta (supra), which the Petitioner alleged was violated, reiterated that "the Ridge is to be kept free from encroachers and its pristine glory must be maintained for all times".

Allegations Against DDA

A Gazette Notification issued by the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi granted an exemption under Section 29 of the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994, for an area measuring 4.9955 hectares for the construction of these approach roads. It also stipulated an advance deposit of Rs. 2,40,54,000 by the DDA for compensatory plantation.

The DDA in 2024 sought the Court’s permission for the felling and translocation of 1,051 trees. However, the Petitioner claimed that tree-felling activities were underway in the Satbari area and alleged that a substantial portion of the Ridge Forest had been decimated.

The Petitioner alleged that the DDA failed to disclose to the Court that the area for which it had sought permission to fell trees had, in fact, already been cleared. It was asserted that the DDA, without awaiting the Court’s adjudication on its applications and in the absence of any express permission, proceeded with the clearing of the Ridge reserved forest as well as the felling of trees on non-forest land. This led to the instant Contempt Petition.

Court’s Reasoning

The Supreme Court stated, “Undeniably, the reckless decimation of a substantial portion of the Delhi Ridge, carried out without any discernible effort to mitigate environmental harm, has resulted in an alarming loss of biodiversity. It must be recognised that a forested area is not solely a collection of trees—it is a delicate and intricate ecosystem comprising of mammals, migratory birds, amphibians, critters and countless other life forms that together inexplicably contribute to the region’s ecological balance. As has already been reiterated, the Delhi Ridge functions as the lungs of the city.”

The Bench remarked that “we must remain mindful that the establishment of CAPFIMS, the felling of trees, and the construction of approach roads are now fait accompli. While it may be theoretically possible to contemplate a reversal of these actions, such a course is practically untenable. In our view, the die is cast, and what is done cannot now be undone—any refusal to put institutions like CAPFIMS to optimal use or to undo road construction at this stage risks not only undermining public interest but also squandering significant public resources.”

Consequently, the Court issued the following directions:

“In light of the extensive ecological damage caused, urgent and time-bound remedial measures must be undertaken by the DDA in coordination with the GNCTD. These efforts shall be guided and overseen by the Committee constituted by this Court and comprising of Shri Ishwar Singh, Shri Sunil Limaye and Shri Pradip Krishen. The following directions are issued to be complied with strictly within a period of three (3) months: a. The DDA is directed to arrange the visit of the Committee to see the suitability of the 185 acres of land identified and proposed to be used towards compensatory afforestation; b. If the Committee opines that such land can be utilised for the purposes of afforestation, it may then, with the assistance of other domain experts, initiate the process of selection or shortlisting of appropriate native species, the methodology of plantation, survival rate monitoring, and post-plantation maintenance and care; c. The Committee may commence the afforestation exercise by formulating a plan that ensures the plantation of trees is undertaken in a manner that optimally maximises the ecological advantage of the impending monsoon season.

ii. In order to ensure strict and effective enforcement of (i) above, the Forest Department shall work under the supervision of the Committee, for which, the entire expenditure is to be borne by the DDA and disbursed to the Forest Department. The Forest Department is directed to strictly abide by the directions issued by the Committee and will be responsible for maintaining detailed records of the health, survival, and mortality rates of the saplings planted.

iii. In furtherance thereof, the DDA and the Forest Department shall submit a jointly signed bi-annual compliance report before this Court, duly supported by photographic and video documentation, clearly evidencing the status and upkeep of the afforested areas. The veracity of such report shall be crosschecked by this Committee. The directions enumerated in (i) to (iii) are also applicable to the afforestation efforts already claimed to have been undertaken by the DDA;

iv. The DDA, in conjunction with the GNCTD and the Forest Department, are further directed to implement in full earnest the comprehensive measures recommended by the Courtappointed Committee in its final report, aimed at enhancing and restoring the green cover within the National Capital Territory of Delhi. These measures shall be treated as binding and implemented under the supervision of the Committee, with periodic progress reports filed before this Court;

v. The directions contained in (i) to (iii) shall equally apply to I.A. No. 98622/2024 in W.P. (C) No. 202/1995, which involves the diversion of 6,200 square metres of Morphological Ridge land located at Plot No. 11B Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Accordingly, the DDA, in conjunction with the Forest Department, is directed to identify an appropriate parcel of land and report the same to the Committee to ensure effective compliance and implementation of these directions;

vi. The DDA is further directed to ensure the expeditious completion of the approach roads as envisaged, keeping in mind that the construction was at varying stages of progress prior to the cessation of work. The Committee, in this context, may also explore the possibility of implementing a thick coverage of healthy trees on both sides, in congruence with such road construction;

vii. In view of the concerns raised regarding the potential undue benefit accruing to certain affluent residential owners from the construction of the approach roads, the GNCTD, in consultation with DDA, is directed to undertake a due identification exercise of such beneficiaries. Upon such identification, the GNCTD, along with DDA, shall be at liberty to impose a one-time levy, commensurate with the proportionate cost of construction, on such affluent individuals who may be the direct beneficiaries of the newly constructed road. Such a fee shall, however, be levied in accordance with principles of natural justice;

viii. Since the First Respondent was not an officer in the DDA cadre and is no longer holding any position in that organisation, we deem it appropriate to close the proceedings qua him. However, all other Respondents and officials of DDA found responsible by the internal inquiry for the acts leading to the present contempt are directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 25000 each as an environmental fee with the Forest Department, in addition to and without any prejudice to the departmental action that may be taken against them. This sum can be utilised towards the remedial measures sought to be undertaken, as the Committee deems fit. Additionally, we direct that a formal penalty of censure be imposed upon all such officials. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings against the Respondents are closed;

ix. The departmental proceedings initiated against the erring DDA officials, if pending, shall be concluded expeditiously and in any event no later than six months; and

x. Similar contempt petitions or proceedings pending before the Delhi High Court in relation to the same cause of action also stand disposed of.”

Cause Title: Bindu Kapurea v. Subhashish Panda & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 784)

Click here to read/download the Judgment