The Supreme Court on Wednesday (May 28, 2025) noted that the willful disobedience, deliberate concealment of the fact of the tree felling in the protected Delhi ridge area and a series of miscommunications by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) officials left Lieutenant Governor V.K. Saxena in an “embarrassing position”.
The Delhi Lieutenant Governor (L-G) is also the ex officio chairperson of the DDA.
“Without delving into excessive detail, it is an admitted position that the former DDA vice-chairperson (Subhashish Panda) and officials of the DDA acted in an errant manner, which not only amounted to a concealment of this court’s directions but also led to an unfortunate and avoidable misconstruction of communications attributed to the L-G, thereby placing him in an embarrassing position,” the Supreme Court judgment authored by Justice Surya Kant observed.
The petitioners had alleged that the trees were chopped down on the orders of the Lieutenant Governor, who had visited the site on February 3 last year. On October 16 last year, the apex court had decided to have the L-G file an affidavit explaining his alleged role and what really happened on February 3.
Mr. Saxena had maintained that he had visited the road-widening site on February 3 enroute from the CAPFIMS Hospital site. He had claimed no one from the DDA had informed him that felling the trees would require permission from the Supreme Court.
The court said the actions of the DDA officials cumulatively resulted in “flagrant contempt” of the apex court directions on tree-felling.
Closing the proceedings against Mr. Panda as he was no longer an officer in the DDA cadre, the apex court directed DDA officials found responsible by the internal inquiry for the acts leading to the present contempt to deposit a sum of ₹25,000 each as an environmental fee with the Forest Department.
“We must state that the instant matter is yet another classic case of institutional missteps and administrative overreach. The facts before us reveal a troubling pattern: permissions not obtained, court orders ignored, and environmental degradation inflicted with impunity. Such actions certainly raise fundamental concerns about governance and accountability,” the court noted.
Justice Kant said it was only the overwhelming public interest served by the establishment of CAPFIMS that has, in effect, overshadowed the sheer administrative incompetence and blatant disregard for both established procedures and the orders of this court.
Published – May 29, 2025 12:32 am IST
