The bench sought to know if any of the officials present on the day of the L-G’s visit had informed him that the court’s permission was needed to fell the trees for widening the approach road to the hospital. “At the risk of repetition, there is a cover up,” said Justice Oka.

“We realized the role played by the LG the day the Attorney General appeared on his own. That was sufficient indication,” he said.

The Supreme Court pulled up the Delhi government too. It “must take the blame for granting permission to fell 422 trees” as it did not have any statutory power, the court said. It asked the Delhi government how it proposed to compensate for the damage caused to the environment.

Having perused the affidavits filed by DDA Vice Chairman and the Principal Secretary of Delhi Environment and Forest Department, the Supreme Court said, “Prima facie it appears to us that there was reluctance on the part of all concerned to bring on record what exactly transpired during the visit of… Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. Now the truth has come out.”

The court also drew attention to an affidavit filed by one of the officials — Ashok Kumar Gupta, Additional Director General (Projects Delhi), CPWD, with additional charge as Engineer Member, DDA — present during the LG’s visit to CAPFIMS. “The Hon’ble LG expressed his concern on the slow progress of road widening work and stressed upon speeding it up,” read the affidavit.

Gupta said in the affidavit the LG sought to know how the DDA proposed to deal with trees/shrubs coming on the alignment of the road portion to be widened. He was informed that felling of trees had not been initiated because permission was awaited from the competent authority.

“On this, the Hon’ble LG informed that for the trees falling under DPTA, the forest department has already taken approval from him as per due process on file. He directed the forest department to convey the same to DDA at the earliest,” Gupta said in his affidavit.

As far as the DDA was concerned, the court said, the question was whether it told the contractor to fell the trees on the basis of oral directions by LG on February 3, 2024, or whether there was any independent decision taken by any authority of DDA to proceed with felling of trees.

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, who appeared for the DDA Vice Chairman said the LG had only endorsed a proposal already approved by the Delhi government. “In that case, there is complete non-application of mind by LG as well. He presumed that the Delhi government has the power of a tree officer,” said Justice Oka.

Referring to Gupta’s affidavit, which said that the LG when apprised of the hindrances coming in the alignment of the road portion to be widened, directed the concerned department to club all court cases related to land falling in the right of way, Justice Oka said, “So he is acting as a court, directing that all cases should be clubbed together.”

To this, Senior Advocate Singh said, “That may be a wrong understanding…this is only about the urgency of a hospital.”

Responding to a specific query from the court, the Delhi government said that it will withdraw the notification dated February 14, 2024 “purportedly issued under section 29 of the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994, granting permission for felling the 422 trees”. The court said that only the tree authority could have granted permission to fell trees and not the NCT government.

On the role of the NCT government, the Supreme Court said on the face of it, the government purported to give permission to DDA to fell 422 trees. “Senior counsel appearing for the Delhi government on instructions, states that part of the trees covered by the notification, were also forming part of the ridge area,” the court said.

“It is an admitted position as reflected from the statement made by the tree officer that for cutting 422 trees, the tree officer had never granted any permission. The government must take the blame for granting permission to fell 422 trees; There was no statutory power vesting in the Delhi government,” the court said.

The bench said the Delhi government affidavit also showed this was not the only instance where the forest department of the Delhi government purported to grant permission for felling of trees. “They have done this earlier,” it said.

“The stand of the Delhi government is that DDA has accepted that they misread the notifications issued by the Delhi government. That will not absolve Delhi government from the responsibility of passing orders, permitting felling of trees, although no statutory power is vested in the Delhi government. Therefore, the Delhi government must also come out with action, if any, taken against the erring officers who have purported to grant such permission not once, but more than once,” the court said.

The court also said if any officer of the state government or DDA present at the site had informed the LG that the Supreme Court permission was needed for felling trees, they may file an affidavit.

“We hope and trust that the Delhi government will immediately stop exercising the non-existing power of granting permission for felling of trees,” the court said. It also asked the state how many such permissions were granted during the last five years and place the permission for those on record.

It also issued a notice on a plea by one of the petitioners who complained that the Special Cell of Delhi police was making inquiries and took their bank details after they filed the contempt petition highlighting the “illegal” felling of trees. “At this stage, we may not issue any directions, but we make it very clear for the benefit of all authorities that no one will make any attempt to cause any harassment to the petitioners…” the Court said.