Disposed

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 141/2024 in Original Application No. 409/2022 of Dinesh Kumar vs

NGT16 Apr 2025Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 141/2024 in Original Application No. 409/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal addressed the illegal cutting of six Jand trees and the Forest Department's practice of compounding such offenses. The Court directed enhanced instructions on when compounding is permissible and ordered mandatory compensatory plantation of 60 trees with seven-year maintenance to remediate environmental damage.

What did the court decide?

Directed issuance of guidelines on compounding offenses and mandatory compensatory plantation of 60 trees with 5-year maintenance.

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 141/2024 in… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No. 02

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Misc Application in Disposed of Cases No. 141/2024 In Original Application No. 409/2022

¶5

Dinesh Kumar Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Haryana & Ors. Respondents

¶8

Date of hearing: 16.04.2025

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶10

Applicant: None for the Applicant.

¶11

Respondents: Mr. Rahul Khurana, Advocate for DC and DFO Charkhi Dadri With Mr. Ravindra Singh, RFO, Bhadra, Charkhi Dadri.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The applicant-Dinesh Kumar had sent a letter petition dated

¶14

05.04.2022 to this Tribunal which was treated and registered as O.A. No.

¶15

409/2022 for exercise of suo motu jurisdiction.

¶16

The applicant raised the grievances regarding illegal cutting of trees from his joint agricultural land and not taking of any action by the concerned Authorities.

¶17

Vide order dated 11.07.2022, this Tribunal disposed of the application by constituting a Joint Committee comprising Divisional Forest

¶18

¶19

Officer (DFO) and Deputy Commissioner, Charkhi Dadri, Haryana and directing the same to verify the factual position, look into the grievances of the applicant and take remedial action by following due process within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and file report within two months before Ld. Registrar General of this Tribunal who was given liberty to place the matter before the Bench for further directions, if considered necessary.

¶20

Report as directed was not filed by the Joint Committee and due to non-compliance of order dated 11.07.2022, the matter was listed before the Bench by the Registry by registering present Miscellaneous Application.

¶21

Vide order dated 25.11.2024 the Joint Committee was given opportunity to file compliance report.

¶22

In compliance thereof, report dated 16.12.2024 of the Joint Committee was filed by the DFO, Charkhi Dadri.

¶23

Objections to the report of the Joint Committee have been filed by the applicant via email dated 06.02.2025.

¶24

None has appeared for the applicant today.

¶25

We have heard learned counsels for respondents and gone through the relevant record carefully.

¶26

The relevant part of the compliance report of the Joint Committee filed by the DFO, Charkhi Dadri reads as under:-

¶27

“3. That the applicant Dinesh Kumar also presented the same complaint before the Range Forest Officer, Badhra on 04.04.2022 and the beat Incharge Sh. Paramjeet Singh, Forest Guard, Badhra Beat inspected the site to verify the facts of the complaint and found that Smt. Sarita wife of Sh. Vikas resident of village Sirsali has cut 6 trees of Jand (Prosopis cineraria) illegally from her field. This area is closed under General Section 4 of Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 and

¶28

¶29

no green tree felling is allowed without the prior permission of the concerned Divisional Forest Officer. Smt. Sarita wife of Sh. Vikas never obtained any permission from the Divisional Forest Officer, Charkhi Dadri for felling of these trees. Therefore, after verifying the facts, Forest Offence Report (FOR) No. 085/0734 dated 04.04.2022 was issued in the name of Smt. Sarita wife of Sh. Vikas resident of village Sirsali. Copy of FOR is annexed as Annexure R-1. Smt. Sarita wife of Sh. Vikas accept her illegal act and deposited compensation of Rs. 3000/- on 05.04.2022 with the Forest Department. In this regard receipt no. 341 dated 05.04.2022 issued and copy of receipt is annexed as Annexure R-2. Statement of Sarita was also recorded and the same is annexed as Annexure R-3.

¶30

4. That statement of the concerned alleged persons (Surender Kumar son of Daya Nand, Raj Kumar son of Daya Nand and Vikas son of Phool Chand) have also been recorded and copy of the same are also annexed as Annexure R-4 to R-6 respectively. In their statement, they have told that the case for partition of joint land is pending. They have also stated that these trees have been cut from the land which is being cultivated by the husband of Smt. Sarita since long time. They have also stated that the husband of Smt. Sarita is in Government service away from his village, therefore, his wife (Smt. Sarita) is looking after his agricultural land and these trees have been cut by Smt. Sarita. They have also stated that this complaint has been filed only to withdraw the partition petition. Statement of complainant (Dinesh) has also been recorded in which he reiterated the facts of complaint. He also stated that the compensation has been taken from Smt. Sarita which is only to misled the Hon'ble Court. Copy of Statement of Dinesh is annexed as Annexure R-7.

¶31

5. That after receipt of order dated 25.11.2024, Deputy Commissioner, Charkhi Dadri directed to Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Badhra and Divisional Forest Officer, Charkhi Dadri to verify the facts of action taken by the Forest Department. After direction of the Deputy Commissioner, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsildar, Badhra and Range Forest Officer, Badhra inspected the site on 09.12.2024 and statements of affected persons including applicant recorded. Village Sarpanch and Numbardar also called on spot and statement of them also recorded. Statement of the following persons recorded on spot on 09.12.2024:-

¶32

1. Sh. Jhabbu Ram, Numbardar, Sirsali.

¶33

2. Satyawan, Panch, Gram Panchayat, Sirsali.

¶34

3. Sarita wife of Vikas, Village Sirsali.

¶35

4. Vikas son of Phool Chand, Village Sirsali.

¶36

5. Raj Kumar son of Daya Chand, Village Sirsali.

¶37

6. Bhup Singh son of Anand Prakash, Village Sirsali.

¶38

7. Naresh son of Anand Prakash, Village Sirsali.

¶39

8. Bijender son of Bahadur Singh, Village Sirsali

¶40

9. Dinesh Kumar son of Hind Prakash, Village Sirsali.

¶41

6. That Tehsildar, Badhra and Range Forest Officer, Badhra submitted the joint inspection report vide letter no. 569 dated

¶42

¶43

10.12.2024 to the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Charkhi Dadri and verify the facts of action taken by the Forest Department. In joint inspection report, it has also been mentioned that the land from which trees have been cut, is being cultivated by Vikas son of Phool Chand/Sarita wife of Vikas resident of village Sirsali since 30-35 years and now crop of wheat has been sown. Action has already been taken according to rule and no action is pending in this regard. Copy of Joint Inspection Report alongwith statements is annexed as Annexure R-8.

¶44

7. That Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Badhra has also submitted the report to Deputy Commissioner, Charkhi Dadri vide their letter no.2207 dated 10.12.2024 and reiterated the facts of the Joint Inspection Committee. Copy of report dated 10.12.2024 of the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Badhra is annexed as Annexure R-9

¶45

8. That it is clear from the above facts that the green trees have been cut without prior permission of the competent authority. Therefore, after verifying the facts, action had already been taken by the forest department in 2022 itself against the accused as stated above and no action is pending in this regard. However, Action Taken Report could not be submitted within time granted by this Hon'ble Tribunal and this omission is regretted. It is undertaken to be careful in future for timely submission of report before this Hon'ble Tribunal.”

¶46

In the present case 6 trees of Jand ( Prosopis cineraria ) were illegally cut by Smt. Sarita wife of Sh. Vikas resident of village Sirsali from the land covered by notification under Section 4 of Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900 without obtaining requisite permission from the concerned Divisional Forest Officer. Forest Offence Report (FOR) No. 085/0734 dated 04.04.2022 was issued against Smt. Sarita wife of Sh. Vikas resident of village Sirsali who accepted her illegal act and deposited compensation of Rs. 3000/- on 05.04.2022 with the Forest Department and action has already been taken by the concerned Divisional Forest Officer.

¶47

However, in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case and also cases of illegal cutting of trees coming up before us, we are of the considered view that in cases of illegal cutting of trees, the following two important aspects require deliberation and appropriate intervention:-

¶48

(i) In cases of illegal cutting of trees coming up before this Tribunal, we have observed that generally the Forest Department, as a matter of

¶49

¶50

universal practice, permits compounding of all cases of illegal cutting of trees without looking into the reasons for felling of the trees and attendant facts and circumstances. Compounding of all cases of illegal felling of trees as a matter of universal practice virtually renders the statutory provisions for prosecution and punishment of the violators nugatory and redundant. Generally speaking, compounding of offence of illegal cutting of trees may be permitted only in exceptional cases such as where trees had dried up or become dangerous and required urgent felling etc. or there are mitigating factors justifying such compounding.

¶51

(ii) We have also observed that even when such offences are compounded and compensation is deposited with the Forest Department, no remedial matters are taken for remedying the environmental damage caused in the area by such illegal feeling of trees. Cutting of green trees has adverse environmental impact on the flora, fauna and environment of the area and remedial measures are essentially required to remedy the environmental damage thereby caused. Generally speaking, under the orders passed by this Tribunal, 10 trees are to be planted for one tree illegally cut. An assessment is essentially required to be made as to what amount will be required for carrying out such compensatory plantation and also for taking care of the same for minimum period of 5 years to ensure survival thereof. The amount required to be deposited for compounding of forest offense has to be adequate to meet the requisite expenses for carrying out such compensatory plantation and also for taking care of the same for minimum period of 5 years to ensure survival thereof.

¶52

The PCCF (HoFF), Haryana is directed to look into the matter personally and take requisite action for issuance of appropriate

¶53

¶54

instructions in this regard within three months. The instructions so issued may be uploaded on the website of the Forest Department.

¶55

For remediation of the environmental damage caused by illegal cutting of the trees, the DFO, Charkhi Dadri is directed to carry out compensatory plantation of 60 trees in lieu of 6 trees illegally cut in the vicinity thereof during the forthcoming monsoon season, to geo tag the trees so planted and to make necessary arrangements for maintenance of the trees so planted for period of 5 years to ensure survival thereof and file report in this regard before learned Registrar General of this Tribunal within six months.

¶56

This Miscellaneous Application is disposed of accordingly with directions as mentioned above.

¶57

A copy of this order be sent to the PCCF (HoFF), Haryana and the DFO, Charkhi Dadri by email for requisite compliance.

¶58

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶59

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶60

April 16^th , 2025 M.A in Disposed of Cases No. 141/2024 In Original Application No. 409/2022 AB

¶61

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 141/2024 in Original Application No. 409/2022 of Dinesh Kumar vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 141/2024 in Original Application No. 409/2022 of Dinesh Kumar vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 124/2023 in Original Application No. 692/2022 of Junaid Ayubi vs State of Uttrakhand

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 85/2024 in Original Application No. 55/2024 of Gopal Chandra Vanwassi vs Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 123/2023 in Original Application No. 442/2022 of Juned Ayubi vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 114/2024 in Original Application No. 550/2022 of Pramod Kumar Agarwal vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 1/2025 in Original Application No. 65/2019 of Mr. Ajay Jayvantrao Bhosale vs Union of India

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 40/2024 in Original Application No. 101/2023 of 1. Gobardhan Prasad Dalai S/O Late Sripati Charan Dalai Aged About 68YEARS vs 1. State of Odisha Revenue & Disaster Department Odisha Bhubaneswar

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 17/2025 in Original Application No. 114/2022 of Sirin Tammana vs State of Odisha Represented by Its Chief Secretary

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 16/2025 in Original Application No. 114/2022 of Sirin Tammana vs State of Odisha Represented by Its Chief Secretary

Pateshwari Prasad Singh vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 114/2024 in Original Application No. 550/2022 of Pramod Kumar Agarwal vs

Ia No. 275/2025 in Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 137/2024 of Durga Prasad Yadav vs

Sunil Vaid vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Pushp Saini vs Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 33/2025 in Original Application No. 400/2022 of Dheeraj Goel vs