Citizens’ intervention makes NGT order PMC to axe only 18 trees from the proposed 61 for overbridge; peoples’ efforts lauded

The Tribunal had appointed a joint committee including a PMC representative to prepare a report on the ground situation. Thereafter, the PMC mentioned that it would require the felling of only 18 trees to carry out the construction.

“It is clear that as per the previous proposal of PMC, 61 trees were red-marked to be felled, which ultimately came down to 18 to be felled. We accept the report submitted by the Joint Committee and the recommendations therein are also accepted by us,” said the NGT bench comprising Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh and expert member Vijay Kulkarni.

The Joint Committee in its report stated that the assessment of the age of trees to be felled for the project by PMC was based on a rough estimation with no scientific justification.

It recommended that PMC should remove the red-painted serial numbers that identify trees to be felled for the project and the age of trees should be assessed scientifically while submitting the revised proposal. The civic body should consider the objections of citizens in the revised proposal and also follow the program of compensatory plantation for trees felled, it added.

The NGT bench has warned the civic authorities that if such errors were repeated, it would be compelled to impose fines on them.

“We appreciate the efforts made by the applicants for saving (a) number of trees by their prompt approach before the NGT,” the bench said. It also commended the efforts of senior citizen Nandinidevi Pant Pratinidhi of Hadapsar, who submitted an affidavit in the case. Pratinidhi enumerated the red-marked trees and attended the hearings despite her advanced age.

In her affidavit filed under ‘Right to Life’, Pantpratinidhi said, “I would like to point out to the tribunal that since the enactment of the Maharashtra (Urban areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act, 1975, I have observed that the Act is being used as a tool now for increased felling of trees and destruction of urban green cover and sites than for the actual protection and preservation of trees and environment.”

Pantpratinidhi contended that the provision for compensatory tree plantation was being misused to sanction the felling of trees and divert government-owned lands to third parties for private gain.