Laxmi Narayan Vs Government NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Laxmi Narayan Vs Government NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the DCF (Deputy Conservator of Forests (South), GNCTD) or any other appropriate authority under the DCF to replant a suitable sapling (preferably 4 to 5 feet in height) at the site in replacement of the previously existing Neem Tree within 3 weeks, ensuring site suitability and protection of the sapling, with an action taken report and photographs to be filed within 1 week thereafter; impugned judgement modified to that extent.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking action against the shopkeeper alleged to have poisoned the Neem Tree and directions for replanting/replacement of the tree was rightly dismissed by the learned Single Judge. +1 more

Court's answer

Without entering into the controversy raised by the appellant or the challenge to the impugned judgement, the Division Bench directed the DCF (Deputy Conservator of Forests (South), GNCTD) or any other appropriate authority under the DCF to take appropriate steps to replant a suitable sapling (preferably of 4 to 5 feet height) at the site in question in replacement of the previously existing Neem Tree, ensuring the existing site is made suitable for replantation and that the sapling is not uprooted or harmed in any manner.

Ratio / Principle

The replantation exercise was ordered to be carried out within 3 weeks from the date of the order, with an action taken report along with photographs to be filed within 1 week thereafter.

Key takeaways

The appeal was disposed of by modifying the impugned judgement to the aforesaid extent, and pending applications, if any, also stood disposed of.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Division Bench: the Chief Justice, Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, and Tushar Rao Gedela, J) disposed of LPA 4/2025, an appeal against the learned Single Judge's judgement/order dated 08.8.2024 dismissing W.P.(C) 13230/2023, which had sought action against a shopkeeper alleged to have poisoned a Neem Tree and directions to replant/replace it. Without entering into the appellant's challenge to the soil-sample lab report obtained from a privatized laboratory, and noting the respondent's admission that the Tree Officer under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994 and preservation/replanting of trees fall within the jurisdiction of the Deputy Conservator of Forests (South), GNCTD, the Bench directed the DCF or an appropriate authority under it to replant a suitable sapling (preferably 4 to 5 feet in height) at the site in replacement of the Neem Tree within 3 weeks, to ensure the site is made suitable and the sapling is not uprooted or harmed, and to file an action taken report with photographs within 1 week thereafter. The impugned judgement was modified to that extent and pending applications were disposed of.

$~1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- LPA 4/2025 & CM APPL.80-82/2025

LAXMI NARAYAN .....Appellant

Through: Mr. Amar Nath Saini, Advocate with Ms. Neelam Pathak, Mr. Karan Gupta, Mr. Rohit Singh & Ms. Kashish Gupta, Advocates.

versus

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Anjesh Dahiya, Advocate for Mr. Jawahar Raja, ASC for R-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

O R D E R

% 06.02.2025

The appellant has filed the present appeal challenging the judgement/order dated 08.8.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge, in underlying writ petition bearing W.P.(C) 13230/2023 captioned “Laxmi Narayan Vs Government of NCT Delhi & Anr” , seeking a direction for initiating appropriate action against one shopkeeper alleged to have poisoned and caused the death of a “Neem Tree” in question alongwith suitable direction to replant/replace with the new tree in place of tree in question, was dismissed.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Single Judge by way of the impugned judgement, had dismissed the underlying writ petition based on the lab report of soil sample, obtained from a privatized laboratory. He states that the veracity and authenticity of the said report is highly doubtful. According to him, proper protocols for sample testing from a laboratory

LPA 4/2025

Page 1 of 2

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/02/2025 at 12:48:16

duly approved by the government, were not followed by the concerned authorities.

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant would be satisfied in case the alternative prayer directing the respondent authorities to plant a tree at the site in question is allowed.

On a query, learned for the respondent no.1/Deputy Conservator of Forests admits that the Tree Officer under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994, and preservation and replanting of trees would fall within the jurisdiction of Deputy Conservator of Forests(South), GNCTD (for short “DCF” ) .

Without entering into the controversy raised by the appellant or the challenge laid to the impugned judgement, we find it apposite, in the facts of the present case, to direct the DCF or any other appropriate authority under the DCF to take appropriate steps to replant a suitable sapling (preferably of 4 to 5 feet of height) at the site in question in replacement of the previously existing Neem Tree . The authorities shall ensure that the existing site is made suitable for such replantation and adequate care is taken to ensure that the said sapling is not uprooted or harmed in any manner.

The said exercise shall be carried out within 3 weeks from date and the action taken report along with the photographs be filed within 1 week thereafter. 7. The appeal is disposed modifying the impugned judgement to the aforesaid extent. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J

FEBRUARY 06, 2025/ rl

LPA 4/2025

Page 2 of 2

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/02/2025 at 12:48:16