80-year-old told to plant 21 trees for one fallen neem, Delhi HC slams govt

Justice Amit Mahajan orally inquired from the state, “How can you pass such an order? You’re not a court.”

The court also said the Delhi Preservation of Trees (DPT) Act, under which the government order was issued, was “badly drafted”.

From a fallen tree to a complaint

On May 11, 2024, a severe dust storm and thunderstorm struck Delhi, with wind speeds reaching up to 77 km/h. The neem tree outside Bhatia’s home was uprooted.

Part of the tree was left hanging dangerously over live electric wires. Bhatia, in his plea filed in court, said he complained to the MCD’s horticulture division seeking action.

According to Bhatia, it took the MCD about two months to attend to the site. The civic body cut the fallen tree into pieces and carried away the material along with about two-thirds of the stem. About one-third of the stem was left at the site, where, Bhatia said, it continues to rot.

Bhatia, in his plea, contended that his estranged younger son, with whom he is already embroiled in a partition suit dispute, subsequently complained against him, alleging that he had illegally felled the tree.

Following this, the forest department’s tree officer initiated proceedings against Bhatia, issuing notice to appear before the officer in December 2024.

21 trees, and seven years of maintenance

On August 17 this year, the tree officer, holding Bhatia to be preliminarily in violation of the Delhi Preservation of Trees (DPT) Act, issued a series of directions.

Bhatia was ordered to plant “20 tall saplings at a nearby location, along with the planting of one additional tree at the same site”.

The order specified that the saplings had to be native tree species, with a minimum height of six feet and a collar girth of at least 10 cm.

He was also directed to ensure the “maintenance, watering, and complete survival” of all the saplings for seven years, including replacing any that died.

Before the order was passed, Bhatia had told the forest department that, given his medical condition, it would “not be possible” for him to look after the proposed trees.

What the forest dept said

The deputy forest conservator defended the move in court, citing Section 31 of the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act.

This section empowers tree officers with quasi-judicial and legal powers, including summoning witnesses, issuing a search warrant under CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) etc, and also empowering them to issue directions to persons to make alternate plantation.

Section 24 of the Act further provides for imposition of penalty for violating any provisions of the Act, including violating order of the tree officer.

The argument did not convince Justice Mahajan. He orally remarked, “You have no power… How can you ask someone to plant trees if they don’t want to?… This is a badly drafted Act, I don’t know who has drafted this Act.”

The High Court has sought a response from the Delhi government’s forest department.