LG thinks he is court; cover up over his role in tree felling went on for three days: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday said there was a complete non-application of mind by Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) VK Saxena in granting permission for felling of trees despite pendency of Delhi Development Authority (DDA)'s application for it before the top court [Bindu Kapurea v. Subhasish Panda]..A Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan took strong exception to the LG's role in felling of trees without taking prior permission of the Court.The Court also berated the attempt to cover up the LG's role.The Bench said that it should have been informed on the first day of the hearing itself that the LG already had issued directions for tree felling. "First date, we should have been told that LG had given directions. Cover up went for 3 days. We understood from the day of LG involvement when AG R Venkatramani himself appeared before us. It is very clear. Affidavit shows that DDA sought permission of LG. There is complete non-application of mind by LG as well, he presumed that Delhi Government has power of tree officer," Justice Oka observed.The Court also asked if LG Saxena thought of himself as a court and questioned whether the officials of DDA had informed him that top court's permission was required for cutting the trees."I think LG is thinking he is a court," Justice Oka said..I think LG is thinking he is a court.Justice AS Oka.The Court also said everybody including the LG had made mistakes in the matter and chosen to do cover-ups instead of coming to court with clarification."LG knows what is the position, Delhi Government and DDA knows it as well. This cover up should not have been done and on the first day only, this should have been told," it observed..The Court went on to call the developments a sorry state of affairs and also questioned Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, representing the DDA, for defending the actions of the LG."This is a sorry state of affairs as to what is happening. We should have been told the first day only that LG had given directions," it said.The Court observed that LG Saxena appeared to have been worried because some project was getting delayed. Singh, however, tried to submit that it was not so."If being an advocate of DDA, you are defending LG that means you are not with clean hands," the Court told Singh.At this stage, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani interrupted, saying,"My lords should not jump to the conclusion and make observations against LG."The Court asked whether Jethmalani was representing the LG."Are you appearing for LG? If there is a need we can issue notice to LG," it said.In response, Jethmalani said,"If my lords are making observations against LG, then I am appearing.".In the order, the Court said the government officers and DDA officers would be free to inform the top court whether the LG had been told that he could not have granted the permission for tree felling without the court order.It also directed the DDA to explain whether it had taken the decision to cut the trees on basis of the LG's permission or some independent decision had also been taken.It further issued a notice to the Contractor, who carried out the work of tree felling, to inform the court on whose instructions he had proceeded with the action.The Court also observed that it was an admitted position that the Tree Officer never granted any permission for cutting of 422 trees. It ordered the State to inform it about action being taken against erring officers. "Delhi government must take the blame of illegally granting permission to cut down the 422 trees. Delhi Government must come before this court as to how it will compensate this illegal cutting of trees," it said..The matter concerns the illegal felling of more than hundreds of trees by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in violation of Court's earlier orders that prior permission from the Court should be obtained before such felling is done.In May, the Court had initiated a suo motu contempt of court case against DDA Vice-Chairman Subhasish Panda in this regard. The DDA had earlier filed an application for permission to cut the trees, but gone ahead with the action without any court order in hand.The Bench had on Wednesday issued notice to the Delhi Police on an application accusing its officers of harassing petitioners, including Delhi-based NGO Nature Society,That allegation has been made days after DDA was pulled up by the top court for its failure to disclose information regarding Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena's visit to the site where trees were felled..During today's hearing, the Court also noted that the proposal to cut the trees had been approved by Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal as well without him being informed that the permission from court was required first.However, it added that the directions issued by LG were contemporaneously applied by concerned officers. "It seems like LG has granted permission to the proposal of felling of trees and DDA must implement it. He has even directed that all cases pertaining to the project be clubbed," the Court observed.When DDA counsel said that was an interpretation, the Court said,"You must decide what you are doing, defending LG or appearing for contemnor DDA."When Court asked Singh to be clear whether the LG was informed by anyone in DDA that permission of Supreme Court has to be taken, he said,"Nothing on the affidavit regarding this," he said..The Court also pulled up the Delhi government for its actions in the matter."Tell me is the government thinking it has power of tree officer? DDA says that for felling of trees the exemption was granted by you," the Court asked Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi.It also asked whether the Delhi government was willing to withdraw the permission for tree feeling now."So you have to withdraw this notification? Ask your officer? Nobody is ready to save environment. All are here against this," the Court observed.When Sondhi said it was DDA which had interpreted the government order as permission for tree felling, the Court said,"We are not here to decide the fight between DDA and Delhi Government. We are here to save environment. The permission for ridge forest area by government is contempt. We will issue contempt. Your whole understanding of English is wrong. Ask your officer again if he is withdrawing this notification by government? If he doesn't agree, we will issue contempt notice right now.".Sondhi later informed the Court that government would withdraw the notification of permission for cutting 422 trees. The Court then asked what compensation the State would pay for the tree feeling.When Sondhi said 100 trees for every tree that has been cut will be planted, the Court said,"What else? Your officer has defended this notification in the affidavit. You also show us what prevented you to condition your order of ridge forest area subject to Supreme Court's permission."The Court then said the government must come out with a scheme to compensate the environment. Sondhi said it would be done. The Court was also informed that trees cut by DDA have been seized."Have you made any enquiry before passing the order of attachment, what were the species of trees that were cut? Anybody took the data from the DDA regarding this about the category of trees felt?," the Court asked.It was submitted that majority of the trees were Kikar. The matter will he heard again in August.