Applicant sought policy for tree transplantation and penalties for illegal tree felling. Court dismissed proceedings after High Court seized the matter, citing hierarchical jurisdiction and risk of conflicting orders. Reliance placed on Supreme Court precedents regarding tribunal subordination.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Item No.01
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)
Original Application No.154/2025(CZ)
Nitin Saxena Applicant(s) Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of Hearing: 06.04.2026
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. PRASHANT GARGAVA, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant (s): Mr. Harpreet Singh Gupta, Adv. with Mr. Srajan Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) : None
ORDER
c. Direct strict compliance with mandatory directions passed vide order date May 23, 2025 in OA 68/2025. Direct the concerned departments to place for approval these tree cutting proposals (if any) before the concerned Centrally Empowered Committee.
d. Constitute a Joint Expert Committee comprising representatives from the Forest Department, Public Works Department, State Pollution Control Board, and independent environmental experts to
1
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
(i) conduct a detailed traffic assessment and environmental impact review of the road-widening project, and
(ii) inspect and verify the condition, survival rate, and compliance status of the transplanted and felled trees;
e. Direct environmental impact assessment of the already cut 448 trees through a committee/body from Indian Institute of Forest Management, Bhopal or any other similar national level institute. f. Direct that the said Joint Committee referred to in prayer d above shall also ensure that the transplanted trees are appropriately taken care of. Further, a direction may also be issued for the said land over which these 448 trees have been transplanted is transferred in the name of the Forest Department so that necessary steps for their appropriate care.”
4. Further submissions of the Learned Counsel for the applicant are that felling of such number of cutting down the trees without following due procedure and relevant provisions of Madhya Pradesh Vrikshon Ka Parirakshan (Nagariya Kshetra) Adhiniyam, 2001 causes significant environment damage. Relevant part of 3 to 6 are as follows :
"Section 3: Restriction on felling of trees
Notwithstanding any custom, usage, contract or local-law for the time being in force, no person shall without permission under the provision of this Act fell any tree or cause any tree to be felled in
2
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
any land, whether of his ownership or otherwise, situated within the urban area.
Section 4: Appointment of Tree Officer
The State Government may appoint one or more forest officers of the rank not below that of a Gazetted Forest Officer, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation or Chief Municipal Officer as "Tree Officer" for the purposes of this Act, for each Urban Area. Section 5: Appointment of other officers
The State Government may, from time to time, appoint such other officers and employees of Forest Department or Local Authority as may be considered necessary who shall be subordinate to the Tree Officer.
Section 6: Procedure for obtaining permission to fell, cut, remove or dispose of a tree
1. Any person desiring to fell or remove or otherwise dispose of, by any means, a tree, shall make an application to the concerned Tree Officer for permission in such form and containing such particulars and accompanied by such documents as may be prescribed.
2. On receipt of the application, the Tree Officer shall acknowledge the application and may by order after inspecting the tree and holding such enquiry, as he may deem necessary, either grant permission in whole or in part or refuse permission for reasons to be recorded in writing, within 30 days from the date of receipt of the application:
Provided that no permission shall be granted to any person from the same area on more than two occasions during the same year: Provided further that no permission shall be refused if the treei is dead, diseased or wind fallen; or
ii. constitutes a danger to life and property; or
iii. is substantially damaged or destroyed by fire, lighting, rain or other natural causes; or
iv. constitutes an obstruction to traffic or if necessary for maintenance of power/telephone lines etc.
3. The law under Section 6(3) of the Adhiniyam of 2001 mandates that if any conditions are imposed for felling of trees which may include either compensatory afforestation or where the same is not possible, then the contribution may be made within thirty days from the felling of trees.
4. Right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution includes right to have a clean environment. Further
3
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
the Constitutional (forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 incorporated two significant articles viz. Article 48-A and 51A (g) thereby making the Indian Constitution the first in the world conferring constitutional status to the environment protection. Article 48-A: The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Article 51A(g): It is a duty of every citizen to protect and preserve the environment.
5. The permission granted under sub-section (2) may by subject to the condition that the applicant shall plant another tree or trees of the same or other suitable species on the same site or premises, and where this is not possible make such contribution as may be prescribed, within thirty days from the date the tree is felled or within such extended period as the Tree Officer may allow.
6. If the Tree Officer fails to communicate the decision within the period specified under sub-section (2) the permission applied for shall be deemed to have been granted.
5. In M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (2000) 6 SCC 213 the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 8 held that Articles 48A and 51A(g) must be interpreted in light of Article 21:
“8. .... These two articles have to be considered in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution which provides that no person shall be deprived of his life and liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law. Any disturbance of the basic environment elements, namely air, water and soil, which are necessary for “life”, would be hazardous to “life” within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution .”
In the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MK Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India, 2024 INSC 280 , it has been observed that the right to clean environment and right to be free from adverse effects of climate change are part of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and are two sides of the same coin. In this regard, the Hon’ble Court observed as follows:
“24. Despite a plethora of decisions on the right to a clean environment , some decisions which recognise climate change as a serious threat, and national policies
4
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
which seek to combat climate change, it is yet to be articulated that the people have a right against the adverse effects of climate change. This is perhaps because this right and the right to a clean environment are two sides of the same coin . As the havoc caused by climate change increases year by year, it becomes necessary to articulate this as a distinct right. It is recognised by Articles 14 and 21.”
“35…. It is imperative for states like India, to uphold their obligations under international law, including their responsibilities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to climate impacts, and protect the fundamental rights of all Individuals to live in a healthy and sustainable environment .”
6. Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in the order dated 30.01.2024 in the case M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors. (In Re: Taj Trapezium Zone), WP(C) No. 13381/1984, is observed as follows:-
“We have perused the application very carefully. Even as of today, it is not the case of the applicant/State that any land has been made available for compensatory afforestation. Unless the applicant comes out with a material that a land has been allotted in the close proximity of the existing trees, we cannot go into to the question, at this stage, whether compensatory afforestation will be sufficient and whether translocation is also required to be done in respect of some of the trees . In fact, in the Report No.2/2024 submitted by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), a direction has been issued to the Divisional Forest Officer of Agra to examine whether it is possible to translocate some of the trees. In any case, compensatory afforestation has to be in the close proximity of the place where the existing trees are situated . There is one more important aspect of the matter. Someone will have to do the exercise for ascertaining whether felling of so many trees is really required ”
5
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
7. The another Writ Petition (Civil) No. 182/1996 M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath & Ors. MANU/SC/0416/2000 Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India held as follows :-
“i. The planet Earth which is inhabited by human beings and other living creatures, including animals and birds, has been so created as to cater to the basic needs of all the living creatures. Living creatures do not necessarily mean the human beings, the animals, the birds, the fish, the worms, the serpents, the hydras, but also the plants of different varieties, the creepers, the grass and the vast forests. They survive on fresh air, fresh water and the sacred soil. They constitute the essential elements for survival of "life" on this planet. The living creatures, including human beings, lived peacefully all along. But when the human beings started acting inhumanly, the era of distress began which in its wake brought new problems for survival.
ii. The industrial revolution brought an awakening among the men inhabiting this Earth, that the Nature, with all its resources was not unlimited and forever renewable. The uncontrolled industrial development generating tonnes of industrial waste disturbed the ecological balance by polluting the air and water which in turn, had a devastating effect on the wildlife and, therefore, the early efforts to protect the environment related to the protection of wildlife. But then the two world wars, the first world war (1914-1918) and the second world war (1939 to 1945) during which atomic bombs were exploded resulting in the loss of thousands of lives and burning down of vast expanses of forests, made the man realise that if the environmental disturbances were not controlled, his own survival on this planet would become impossible. The United Nations, therefore, held a Conference on human environment at Stockholm in 1972. In the wake of the resolutions adopted at that Conference, different countries at different stages enacted laws to protect the deteriorating conditions of environment. Here in India, the Legislature enacted
6
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
iii.
three Acts, namely, The Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. It also enacted the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977. Under these Acts, Rules have been framed to give effect to the provisions thereof. They are : The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1975; The Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Rules, 1978; The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1982; The Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) (Union Territories) Rules, 1983; The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986; The Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989; The Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989, The Chemical Accidents (Emergency Planning, Preparedness and Response) Rules, 1996 and hosts of other Rules and Notifications. In the matter of enforcement of rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, this Court, besides enforcing the provisions of the Acts referred to above, has also given effect to Fundamental Rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and has held that if those rights are violated by disturbing the environment, it can award damages not only for the restoration of the ecological balance, but also for the victims who have suffered due to that disturbance. In order to protect the "life", in order to protect "environment" and in order to protect "air, water and soil" from pollution, this Court, through its various judgments has given effect to the rights available, to the citizens and persons alike, under Article 21 of the Constitution. The judgment for removal of hazardous and obnoxious industries from the residential areas, the directions for closure of certain hazardous industries, the directions for closure of slaughterhouse and its relocation, the various directions issued for the protection of the Ridge area in Delhi, the directions for setting up effluent treatment plants to the Industries
7
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
located in Delhi, the directions to Tanneries etc., are all judgments which seek to protect environment.
iv. The recognition of the vice of pollution and its impact on future resources was realised during the early part of 1970. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, during a panel discussion in 1971, concluded that the total environmental expenditure required for improvement of the environment was overestimated but could be reduced by increased environmental awareness and control. In 1972, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development adopted the "POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE" as a recommendable method for pollution cost allocation. This principle was also discussed during the 1972 Paris Summit. In 1974, the European Community recommended the application of the principle by its member States so that the costs associated with environmental protection against pollution may be allocated according to uniform principles throughout the Community. In 1989, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development reaffirmed its use and extended its application to include costs of accidental pollution. In 1987, the principle was acknowledged as a binding principle of law as it was incorporated in European Community Law through the enactment of the Single European Act, 1987. Article 130 Rule 2 of the 1992 Maastricht Treaty provides that Community Environment Policy "shall be based on the principle that the polluter should pay. v. "POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE has also been applied by this Court in various decisions. In Indian Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India MANU/SC/1112/1996 : [1996]2SCR503 , it was held that once the activity carried on was hazardous or inherently dangerous, the person carrying on that activity was liable to make good the loss caused to any other person by that activity. This principle was also followed in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum.
vi. Union of India and Ors. MANU/SC/0686/1996 : AIR1996SC2715 which has also been discussed in the present case in the main judgment. It was for this
8
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
reason that the Motel was directed to pay compensation by way of cost for the restitution of the environment ecology of the area. But it is the further direction why pollution fine, in addition, be not imposed which is the subject matter of the present discussion.
41.(2) Whoever fails to comply with any order issued under Clause (e) of Sub- section (1) of Section 32 or any direction issued by a Court under Sub-section (2) of Section 33 or any direction issued under Section 33A, shall in respect of each failure and on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year and six months but which may extend to six years and fine, and in case the failure continues, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which such failure continues after the conviction for the first such failure.
(3) If the failure referred to in Sub-section (2) continues beyond a period of one year after the date of conviction, the offender shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to seven years and with fine.
viii. Similarly, Section 42 provides that a person shall be liable to be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both. Sub-section (2) of Section 42 also contemplates imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand
9
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
rupees or with both. Section 43 contemplates penalty for contravention of the provisions of Section 24. Section 44 contemplates penalty for contravention of Section 25 or Section 26. They also contemplate imposition of fine. Section 45 provides that if a person who has been convicted of any offence under Section 24 or Section 25 or Section 26 is again found guilty of an offence involving a contravention of the same provision, he shall, on the second and on every subsequent conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to seven years and with fine. Section 45A provides that whoever contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or fails to comply with any order or direction given under this Act, for which no penalty has been elsewhere provided in this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both and in the case of continuing contravention or failure, he may be punished with an additional fine. Section 47 contemplates offences by Companies while Section 48 contemplates offences by Government Departments.
10
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
failure to comply with the provisions of Section 21 or Section 22 or with the directions issued under Section 31A. It provides that the person shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year and six months but which may extend to six years and with fine, and in case the failure continues, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day. Sub-section (2) of this Section provides that if the failure continues beyond the period of one year after the date of conviction, the offender shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to seven years and with fine. Section 38 also provides penalties for certain acts and it provides that for such acts as are referred to in that Section, a person shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both. Section 39 contemplates penalty for contravention of certain provisions of the Act and it provides for imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both, and in the case of continuing contravention, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which such contravention continues after conviction for the first such contravention. Section 40 speaks of offences by companies while Section 41 speaks of offences by Government Departments.
xi. Pollution is a civil wrong. By its very nature, it is a Tort committed against the community as a whole. A person, therefore, who is guilty of causing pollution has to pay damages (compensation) for restoration of the environment and ecology. He has also to pay damages to those who have suffered loss on account of the act of the offender. The powers of this Court under Article 32 are not restricted and it can award damages in a PIL or a Writ Petition as has been held in a series of decisions. In addition to damages aforesaid, the person guilty of causing pollution can also be held liable to pay
11
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
exemplary damages so that it may act as a deterrent for others not to cause pollution in any manner.”
8. The right to healthy environment and right to be free from adverse climate change has been discussed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in W.P. No. 838/2019 titled M.K Ranjitsinh & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 2024 INSC 280 as follows :-
i. “India’s efforts to combat climate change are manifold. Parliament has enacted the Wild Life (Protection)Act 1972, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, the National Green Tribunal Act 2010, amongst others. In 2022, the Energy Conservation Act 2001 was amended to empower the Central Government to provide for a carbon credit trading scheme. The Electricity (Promoting Renewable Energy Through Green Energy Open Access) Rules 2022 were made in exercise of the powers under the Electricity Act 2003 to ensure access to and incentivise green energy. The executive wing of the government has implemented a host of projects over the years including the National Solar Mission (discussed in greater detail in the subsequent segment), the National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency, the National Mission for a Green India, and the National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change, amongst others. Despite governmental policy and rules and regulations recognising the adverse effects of climate change and seeking to combat it, there is no single or umbrella legislation in India which relates to climate change and the attendant concerns. However, this does not mean that the people of India do not have a right against the adverse effects of climate change.
ii. Article 48A of the Constitution provides that the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country. Clause (g) of Article 51A stipulates that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for 12
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
living creatures. Although these are not justiciable provisions of the Constitution, they are indications that the Constitution recognises the importance of the natural world. The importance of the environment, as indicated by these provisions, becomes a right in other parts of the Constitution. Article 21 recognises the right to life and personal liberty while Article 14 indicates that all persons shall have equality before law and the equal protection of laws. These articles are important sources of the right to a clean environment and the right against the adverse effects of climate change.
iii. In M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath , this Court held that Articles 48A and 51A(g) must be interpreted in light of Article 21:
“8. …. These two articles have to be considered in the light of Article 21 of the constitution which provides that no person shall be deprived of his life and liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law. Any disturbance of the basic environment elements, namely air, water and soil, which are necessary for “life”, would be hazardous to “life” within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution.”
iv. In Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana , this Court recognised the right to a clean environment in the following terms
“7. … The State, in particular has duty in that behalf and to shed its extravagant unbridled sovereign power and to forge in its policy to maintain ecological balance and hygienic environment. Article 21 protects right to life as a fundamental right. Enjoyment of life and its attainment including their right to life with human dignity encompasses within its ambit, the protection and preservation of environment, ecological balance free from pollution of air and water, sanitation without which life cannot be 13
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
enjoyed. Any contra acts or actions would cause environmental pollution. Environmental, ecological, air, water, pollution, etc. should be regarded as amounting to violation of Article 21. Therefore, hygienic environment is an integral facet of right to healthy life and it would be impossible to live with human dignity without a humane and healthy environment. Environmental protection, therefore, has now become a matter of grave concern for human existence. Promoting environmental protection implies maintenance of the environment as a whole comprising the man-made and the natural environment. Therefore, there is a constitutional imperative on the State Government and the municipalities, not only to ensure and safeguard proper environment but also an imperative duty to take adequate measures to promote, protect and improve both the man-made and the natural environment.”
v. In Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board v. C. Kenchappa ,this Court took note of the adverse effects of rising sea levels and rising global temperatures. In Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. (3) v. Bombay Environmental Action Group this Court recognised that climate change posed a “major threat” to the environment.
vi. Despite a plethora of decisions on the right to a clean environment, some decisions which recognise climate change as a serious threat, and national policies which seek to combat climate change, it is yet to be articulated that the people have a right against the adverse effects of climate change. This is perhaps because this right and the right to a clean environment are two sides of the same coin. As the havoc caused by climate change increases year by year, it becomes necessary to articulate this as a distinct right. It is recognised by Articles 14 and 21.
vii. Without a clean environment which is stable and unimpacted by the vagaries of climate change, the
14
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
right to life is not fully realised. The right to health (which is a part of the right to life under Article 21) is impacted due to factors such as air pollution, shifts in vector-borne diseases, rising temperatures, droughts, shortages in food supplies due to crop failure, storms, and flooding. The inability of underserved communities to adapt to climate change or cope with its effects violates the right to life as well as the right to equality. This is better understood with the help of an example. If climate change and environmental degradation lead to acute food and water shortages in a particular area, poorer communities will suffer more than richer ones. The right to equality would undoubtedly be impacted in each of these instances.
“Acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity.”
viii. This acknowledgement of human rights in the context of climate change is underscored in the preamble of the Paris Agreement, which recognizes the interconnection between climate change and various human rights, including the right to health, indigenous rights, gender equality, and the right to development:
ix. India faces a number of pressing near-term challenges that directly impact the right to a healthy environment, particularly for vulnerable and indigenous communities including forest dwellers. The lack of reliable electricity supply for many citizens not only hinders economic development but also disproportionately affects communities, including women and low-income households, further perpetuating inequalities. Therefore, the right to a healthy environment
15
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
encapsulates the principle that every individual has the entitlement to live in an environment that is clean, safe, and conducive to their well-being. By recognizing the right to a healthy environment and the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, states are compelled to prioritize environmental protection and sustainable development, thereby addressing the root causes of climate change and safeguarding the well-being of present and future generations. It is imperative for states like India, to uphold their obligations under international law, including their responsibilities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to climate impacts, and protect the fundamental rights of all individuals to live in a healthy and sustainable environment.
9. The Land Surface Temperature Variations : Case Study Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh by School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi (Ms. Pallavi Tiwari) conference proceeding of 5th International Conference of Countermeasures to Urban Heat Island concluded the findings as follows :-
“Conclusion -
The results of the study indicate that greens along the road and at local level are very crucial in reducing the land surface temperatures. The dense built-up areas in the old Bhopal lack green spaces both as parks as well as roadside plantation and thus experience higher land surface temperatures. The crop lands within the boundary also show higher temperatures, thus tree plantation in the boundaries of crop lands is suggested to lower the temperatures in the peri urban areas of the city. The difference in the temperatures in last five years are maximum in the hinterlands because of the extensive construction in the sprawling city and the increasing distance of the development from the water bodies. Water bodies can be planned in specific locations to maintain the microclimate of the city. Local level strategies specific to the land cover and land use of the local areas (wards) should be made to bring down the land surface temperatures and the subsequent urban heat island intensities in wards.”
10. Another Case Study from Bhopal City on Carbon Sequestration Potential of Trees Planted Along Roadsides narrated that “India is the seventh-largest country in the world. The country is one of the 17 mega bio-diverse countries (Mittermeier and Mittermeier, 2005) occupying just 2.5% of the world's geographical area but supporting 16% of the world's
16
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
human population and 17% of the livestock population (Mukerji, 2003). Per capita availability of forest and productivity are among the lowest when compared to the world’s average, and the immense biotic pressure on the country's forests, making biodiversity conservation a very challenging task (Maan and Chaudhry, 2019). Forest and tree cover in the country is less than one-fourth of the geographical area of the country, which is far behind the national target that strives to have one-third of the total geographical area under forest and tree cover.” Due to urbanization, the condition in the cities as per the environment point of view is at the risk and alarming. However, the roadside plantations/tree avenues in the urban cities play a role not only for improving climatic conditions but significantly contributing to increase area under vegetation in the country. Trees growing along the roadside, either planted or grown naturally, are performing the ecological function not only to reduce the pollution load but also sequester carbon and help mitigate climate change (Da Silva et al., 2010; Singh and Singh, 2015). Additionally, the trees in the urban environment are contributing toward many benefits, e.g. social benefits (recreational opportunities, improving physical/mental health); aesthetic benefits (landscape variations through different colors/textures/forms and densities of plants); climatic benefits (cooling, wind control, air pollution reduction, atmospheric carbon storage, impact on climate) and economic benefits (increased property values, tourism, providing fruits and small timber). In accordance with the 74th amendment of the Indian Constitution in 1992, the municipal and urban development authorities are responsible for creating and maintaining parks and other recreational spaces in city areas (Granville, 2009). But, the Urban Local Bodies (ULB) in India have little mandate to combat climate change (Sami, 2017; 2018; Khosla and Bhardwaj, 2018), the climate change rarely features in the development plans of these bodies as per study undertaken by Khosla and Bhardwaj (2018). An effort has been made in the present article to quantify one of the benefits from the trees for mitigating climate change consequences, i.e. the amount of carbon and atmospheric carbon dioxide equivalent stored in the trees planted on roadside in the campus of Indian Institute of Forest Management (IIFM) Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India. Nationwide implementation of Green India Mission (GIM) of Government of India as a part of National action plan tackling climate change since last one decade, is supposed to increase above and belowground biomass in 10 million ha of forests (including urban forest ecosystems) resulting in increased carbon sequestration of 43 million tons of CO2 equivalent annually by the end of the year 2020 (Ravindranath and Murthy, 2010). The present study is an attempt to analyze carbon sequestration potential of the trees planted along roadsides and suggest the potential species for high biomass and high efficiency of carbon fixation in urban areas.
11. On the Above Ground Biomass (AGB), Carbon Stock and CO2 per ha. study reveals as follows :-
17
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
“It is observed that Leucaena leucocephala, Schleichera oleosa, Dalbergia paniculata, Acacia catechu and Ficus religiosa are the top five plant species which are responsible for maximum carbon storage along the roadsides (Table - 3). Dendrocalmus strictus is also a very useful species (a solid bamboo) as it is found to sequester CO2 equivalent as 26.92 Mg C ha. – 1, which is higher than other tree species. Due to its fast growth, it has the potential to store carbon more efficiently which makes it a viable option for mitigating climate change (Kaushik et al., 2015). D. strictus is also a better option, compared to a few other tropical and temperate plantation species as far as the magnitude of carbon storage in a given time was concerned (Singh et al., 2006). Therefore, institute management has laid more emphasis on a bamboo plantation along roadsides of the campus during the last five years. Leucaena leucocephala (Subabul) is a very fast - growing tree species coming naturally in the institute. The species produces large number of pods and seeds in the months of January/February, which requires minimum amount of moisture and quality soil for the regeneration and survival. The major disadvantage of this species includes its suppressing nature of seedlings of other species to thrive. Hence, due precautions have to be taken for further proliferation of this species along roadsides in the campus. However, the health of Samanea saman trees are a matter of concern as dead, dying, and diseased trees are visible on roadsides. A detailed examination by a team of foresters, pathologists and entomologists are required for underlining the causes of its poor survival. Actually, this species requires deep loamy soil and high rainfall, whereas available soil is too shallow and rocky to support healthy trees of this particular species. This seems to be the most probable reason for the failure of this particular species and future plantation of this species should be avoided on the campus.”
5. The Tribunal further directed as follows:-
“i. Compliance of the Madhya Pradesh Vrikshon Ka Parirakshan (Nagariya Kshetra) Adhiniyam, 2001.
ii. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest is directed to constitute a High Level Centrally Empowered Committee, (CEC) to examine the permission and justification of cutting of trees where the permission is sought for more than 25 trees within the State of Madhya Pradesh.
iii. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and the DFO range are directed to ensure the Geo tagging of all trees to be made mandatory so that accurate records of their location, type and
18
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
number can be maintained. Geo tag data should be published and be made available and reported to the O/o Chief Conservator of Forest.
iv. There should be tree census within the State city wise and district wise to be monitored by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest or official nominated by the PCCF.
v. Centrally Empowered Committee before granting the permission may also consider the alternate to the plan of cutting the trees which could necessitated felling of fewer number of trees or if option is available or not.
vi. Centrally Empowered Committee will also ensure the compensatory afforestation to compensate for the trees that have been cut down and to ensure their survival upto five years with records and progress city wise, district wise.
vii. The PCCF, State of MP must have to ensure that there shall not be any cutting of trees without sanction from the competent authority and necessary directions be issued at the district headquarter and in case of any cutting of trees without due permission of competent authority necessary action must be initiated promptly and immediately.
viii.The Centrally Empowered Committee may also ensure the compensatory afforestation and forestation @ 10 times to 100 times to the ratio of availability of the land in the same area within a time frame.
ix. It will take a minimum of 70 years to 100 years to again regenerate or re-create the green cover created by cutting of 700 trees and thus the destruction of so many trees adversely affect the environment and life of several human beings. Accordingly, the compensation of compensatory afforestation should be in ratio to that period and ratio to the oxygen generated by the plant during the life time of the trees.”
29.10.2025, the Hon’ble High Court has directed as follows:-
“IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WP No.42565 of 2025
19
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
(IN REFERENCE (SUO MOTU) VS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Dated: 29-10-2025
There is an article published in the Times of India, Delhi today dated 29.10.2025 reporting that 488 trees have been axed by PWD without permissions of the National Green Tribunal appointed body near Bhopal. The report further indicates that no permission has been taken from the State Government constituted 9-member Committee or from the Tree Officer. It reports that permission has been granted by the ADM, Raisen for felling of trees.
The article shows shocking state of affairs, where 488 trees are sought to be axed despite the National Green Tribunal declining such an action and repeated orders by this Court. Accordingly, we take suo motu cognizance of the said action of the PWD and direct the Registry to register a suo motu petition.
Issue notice to the State including PWD.
Notice is accepted by Shri Abhijeet Awasthi, Deputy Advocate General and Shri Anubhav Jain, Government Advocate appearing for the State.
We also appoint Shri Amal Pushp Shroti as an amicus curiae to assist the Court.
PWD shall file an affidavit indicating how many trees have been felled for the subject project and how many trees are further sought to be felled. PWD shall also indicate as to whether permission has been obtained from the Special Committee constituted by the State Government in terms of the directions issued by the National Green Tribunal and/or the Tree Officer. We further direct that till the next date of hearing, no tree shall be felled or pruned except in accordance with the permission granted by the Committee and the Tree Officer under the Madhya Pradesh Protection of Trees Act (Urban), 2001. List on 04.11.2025.”
follows:-
“IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WP No. 42565 of 2025
(IN REFERENCE VS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND
OTHERS)
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Dated: 04-11-2025
………..x…………………….x…………..x……………x……………..
I.A.No.21239/2025
For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. Intervener is impleaded as a party.
We note from the documents filed by the Intervener that proposed construction activity is being carried out in the vicinity of a protected monument i.e. Historical Dam of Paramar Period, Kiratnagar.
Accordingly, notice shall issue to the Archaeological Survey of India through the standing counsel. W.P.No.42565/2025
Respondents have filed an affidavit contending that permission was granted by the Collector on 03.06.2025 to translocate 448 trees and of the trees that could not be translocated l0 times the number of trees to be planted.
Respondents are directed to file photographs along with the GPS locations of each of the 253 trees that have been allegedly transplanted. The photographs placed on record of alleged transplanted trees show that none of the trees have been transplanted, rather the trees have been cut completely and the tree trunks have been put in the ground, some of which have started sprouting, however, the photographs do not indicate any of the trees having been retransplanted.
In the affidavit respondents shall also indicate as to what steps have been taken pursuant to order dated 23.05.2025 passed by the National Greens Tribunal in Original Application No.68/2025 (CZ).
Affidavit by the State should also indicate as to whether any Tree Plantation Policy is in force in the State and if not, whether any steps have been taken to formulate a Tree Plantation Policy to preserve the trees.
Let the affidavit be filed within 2 weeks. List on 20.11.2025. Interim order to continue.
The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest is directed to depute a Forest Officer to identify each of the alleged transplanted tree and to ascertain the status and health of the trees that have been allegedly transplanted.”
21
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
“IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
WP No. 42565 of 2025 (IN REFERENCE VS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS) Dated: 20-11-2025 ………..x…………………….x…………..x……………x……………..
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bhopal as well as the General Manager of West Central Railways are impleaded as respondents.
It is pointed out by learned Amicus Curiae that despite this Court directing no tree shall be cut or pruned except in accordance with permission granted by the 9-member Committee or the Tree Officer under the Madhya Pradesh Protection of Trees Act (Urban), 2001, further 244 trees are sought to be cut in Bhopal for construction of certain residential complexes.
Mr. Harpreet Singh Gupta, learned counsel appearing for intervener submits that newspaper report of 20th November, 2025 in Dainik Bhaskar, Bhopal shows that a novel method has been adopted for cutting the trees under the garb of shifting. The reporter has quoted the authorities, who state that it is difficult to obtain permission for cutting of the trees and as such there is a proposal of transplanting the trees for which no permission is required. We note that this Court by order dated 04.11.2025 had directed the State to file an affidavit indicating as to whether there is any Tree Plantation Policy in force in the State to which an affidavit has been filed that there is no such Policy. Further the photographs that had been placed on record show that the manner of transplantation was complete stripping of the tree of all its branches and leaves and planting the tree trunk at an alternate place.
Attention is also drawn to communication dated 30.10.2025 issued by the Executive Engineer, Vidhan Sabha Building Controller to the Principal Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariat stating that on account of construction of the residential complex, several trees are coming in the way and they have to be shifted (uprooted) on account of which a large number of
22
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
branches are being cut and huge quantity of wood is being collected and request has been made to make use of these branches and wood that have been cut from the trees which are coming in the way of the construction.
The above letter clearly shows that the respondents are not in any manner trying to protect or transplant any tree, however, in the process of cutting trees and as many as 244 trees are sought to be cut.
Clearly, it appears that respondents are not interested in protecting or transplanting any tree but are in a rampant manner cutting and destroying the entire vegetation which is coming in the way of alleged development.
Reference may also be had to a news article dated 17.11.2025 of Dainik Bhaskar, Bhopal edition which shows that as many as 8000 trees have been cut for some project of the railways. List on 26.11.2025 at 12:30 p.m.
In the mean time, it is directed that no tree in the entire area of Bhopal shall be cut, pruned or transplanted in any manner except with the leave of this Court.
Further we direct the personal presence of Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Executive Engineer, PWD, (2) Under Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariate (3) Administrative Officer-cum-under Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariate (4) Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhopal (5) Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (6) The Principal Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Secretariate, Bhopal (7) General Manager, West Central Railways for the next date of hearing.
Respondents shall also file photographs of the alleged transplanted trees on the next date of hearing.”
23
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
the statutory Tribunals like – NGT, in the matter of territorial jurisdiction prevails. He has further relied on following precedence:-
“i. Priya Gupta v. Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (2013) 11 SCC 404: This case underscored that government departments are not exempt from complying with court orders. It emphasized that orders from higher courts hold paramount authority, and lower tribunals must adhere to them to maintain legal coherence and respect for the judiciary.
ii. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1995) 1 SCC 400: A Constitutional Bench judgment that established the hierarchy and jurisdictional boundaries between different judicial bodies, reinforcing that statutory tribunals like the NGT are subordinate to High Courts within their territorial jurisdiction. East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1893: This case highlighted the necessity for administrative bodies to follow higher court directives to ensure consistency and predictability in judicial decisions. Official Liquidator v. Dayanand (2008) 10 SCC 1: Reiterated the indispensability of obeying higher court orders to preserve the integrity and functionality of the judicial system. These precedents collectively reinforced the principle that higher courts' orders supersede those of statutory tribunals, ensuring a unified legal framework.
Jurisdictional Hierarchy: The High Court holds territorial jurisdiction, making its orders binding over any subordinate tribunal operating within the same jurisdiction, such as the NGT.
Conflict of Orders: When contradictory orders are issued by the High Court and NGT on the same matter, the higher court's directive takes precedence to prevent legal ambiguity.
Constitutional Authority: Referencing Article 141 of the Constitution of India, the Court emphasized that the law declared by a higher court is binding on all lower courts and - tribunals.
Administrative Sanity: Maintaining a clear hierarchy ensures
24
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
predictable and consistent application of the law, which is essential for administrative efficiency and public trust in the legal system.
By applying these principles, the Supreme Court concluded that the NGT had erred in continuing proceedings that conflicted with the High Court's jurisdiction and order.”
25
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Hon’ble High Court, the present proceedings are dropped. The Original Application No.154/2025(CZ) stands disposed of
accordingly.
Sheo Kumar Singh, JM
Dr. Prashant Gargava, EM
06th April, 2026, Original Application No.154/2025(CZ) AK
26
O.A. No.154/2025(CZ) Nitin Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the jurisdiction of the National Green Tribunal is subordinate to the High Court when the High Court has already taken cognizance of the same matter?
Whether proceedings in the National Green Tribunal should be dropped to avoid conflicting judgments with the High Court?
Whether the High Court's direction takes precedence over the NGT's proceedings in ongoing environmental disputes?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Raghu Ramakrishna Raju KanumuruDistinguished¶187
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Raghu Ramakrishna Raju Kanumuru
Priya Gupta v. Ministry of Health & Family WelfareFollowed¶191
Priya Gupta v. Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (2013) 11 SCC 404 · Who else cites this
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of IndiaDistinguished¶192
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1995) 1 SCC 400 · Who else cites this
East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of CustomsReferred¶192
East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs AIR 1962 SC 1893 · Who else cites this
Official Liquidator v. DayanandDistinguished¶192
Official Liquidator v. Dayanand (2008) 10 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
Nitin Saxena
State of Madhya Pradesh
Sheo Kumar Singh
Dr. Prashant Gargava
As recorded by the court registry
An original application before a tribunal, most commonly a service dispute before the Central or a State Administrative Tribunal.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
