Compensatory Afforestation - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court held the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in contempt for wilfully disobeying its 1996 order prohibiting tree felling in the Delhi Ridge and for concealing this action from the court. The Court emphasized that such conduct obstructs the administration of justice and undermines the Rule of Law, necessitating remedial measures to purge the contempt. Facts Of The Case: This contempt petition before the Supreme Court of India stems from the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) alleged wilful disobedience of the Court's 1996 order in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, which mandated the preservation of the ecologically sensitive Delhi Ridge. The DDA sought approval for constructing approach roads to the Central Armed Police Forces Institute of Medical Sciences (CAPFIMS), entailin...

The Supreme Court affirmed 'Zudpi Jungle' as forest, but allowed pre-1996 non-forestry regularization without NPV or compensatory afforestation. It mandated strict action for post-1996 diversions, declared fragmented Zudpi lands 'Protected Forests,' and ordered transfers to the Forest Department, with conditions for using Zudpi land for compensatory afforestation. Facts Of The Case: This case revolves around the legal status and utilization of "Zudpi Jungle" lands in six districts of Eastern Vidarbha, Maharashtra. Historically, these lands, characterized by bushy growth and inferior soil, were recorded as "Zudpi Forest" or "Scrub Jungle" in revenue records since the early 1900s, often used for grazing and domestic needs. Due to bureaucratic inaction and state reorganization in 1956, thes...

Tag: Compensatory Afforestation

Supreme Court Verdict on Delhi Ridge : DDA Must Pay for Environmental Damage in Delhi Ridge Case