Supreme Court on Monday directed that all pending interlocutory applications in the long-running forest case be categorised to facilitate their disposal through common orders. The Court has also recalled its earlier order that had accepted a recommendation to convert land belonging to the Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation (DTDC) into forest land, observing that the landowner had not been heard before the direction was issued.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi was dealing with several environmental matters ranging from land use in the Delhi Ridge area to forest clearance disputes and tree felling permissions, while also examining the functioning of multiple environmental oversight bodies.
Delhi Ridge Land Dispute: SC Recalls Order Diverting DTDC Land
The Court recalled its earlier order dated February 17, 2025, which had accepted a recommendation of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to convert a parcel of land belonging to the Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation into forest land. The Bench observed that the direction had been passed without hearing the landowning agency, which had been allotted the land by the Delhi government.
“No direction to divert the land owned by DTDC to the Forest Department could be issued without hearing the affected owner in possession.”
It was submitted the land had been allotted for a Kala Kendra and recreation centre, and was temporarily given to the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation for traffic diversion during metro construction. The Court therefore recalled the earlier order but clarified that if any portion of the land is required for the metro project, the agencies may coordinate so that the infrastructure work is not affected.
The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi has been directed to convene a joint meeting of relevant departments to resolve the issue and determine whether the land or any alternative parcel can be used for compensatory afforestation.
Overlap Between Environmental Committees: SC Seeks Clarification
The Court also raised concerns about multiple committees dealing with environmental governance, including the Central Empowered Committee and the Delhi Ridge Management Board. The Bench directed the Union government to file an affidavit detailing:
• the composition of statutory and non-statutory environmental committees,
• their jurisdiction and statutory basis, and
• whether their roles overlap.
“This information is necessary to delineate the areas of operation entrusted to these committees and to identify any overlapping.”
Mirzapur Forest Dispute: SC Sends Matter to NGT
In another environmental dispute concerning alleged illegal tree felling and environmental clearance for a thermal project in Mirzapur, the Court declined to entertain the matter directly. The Bench observed that the issues raised could be effectively addressed by the National Green Tribunal.
“All the prayers made in these applications can be effectively granted by the NGT.”
The Court allowed the petitioner to pursue remedies before the NGT or the High Court and requested the tribunal to consider the matter expeditiously.
Tamil Nadu Road Project: SC Allows Tree Felling with Conditions
The Court also considered an application by the State of Tamil Nadu seeking permission to cut 178 trees for widening an existing road. The Bench granted permission subject to compliance with conditions under the Forest (Conservation) framework, including compensatory afforestation. The state has proposed:
• planting over 24,000 saplings,
• developing forest land for afforestation, and
• implementing soil and water conservation measures.
Pending Environmental Applications to Be Categorised
Given the large number of applications pending in the long-running environment litigation, the Court requested the amicus curiae Mr. K. Parameshwar to categorise all pending interlocutory applications within 2 weeks so that they can be disposed of through common orders.
The Court indicated that once this exercise is completed, the main proceedings from 1995 may be formally closed, with individual environmental disputes treated as independent cases.
“At this stage, we deem it appropriate to request the learned amicus to categorise all the pending IAs under different heads to enable us to dispose of these applications through common orders. We make it clear that once the IAs are categorised, the proceedings in the 1995 matter shall be formally closed. Such sub-categorised groups of IAs will be treated as independent representations…The learned amicus assures that the needful shall be done within two weeks.”