Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of Bombay high court on Friday ruled that compensatory afforestation following tree felling should, as far as possible, be carried out in the same locality or an adjoining area. The court observed that planting trees far away cannot offset the environmental loss suffered by residents of the affected neighbourhood.Disposing of a suo motu PIL initiated over the proposed felling of trees for a commercial project along London Street (Orange Street), a division bench of Justices Anil Kilor and Raj Wakode accepted undertakings furnished by the developer and directed Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) not to permit the felling of even a single tree on Plot No. 3 until environmental clearance is obtained.The court noted that the developer had substantially complied with compensatory plantation requirements for Plots 4 and 5 and had undertaken to complete the remaining plantation obligations for Plot 3 before any permission to cut trees was processed. It also recorded the developer’s assurance that no trees on Plot No. 3 would be felled without both environmental clearance and NMC approval.While disposing of the PIL, the judges issued important guidelines for future cases. They observed that compensatory plantation at distant locations creates a “spatial imbalance” and cannot adequately mitigate the environmental damage caused by tree loss in a particular locality.“The people in the affected area may experience higher temperatures and lower humidity,” they observed, adding that removing mature trees also increases air pollution, affects groundwater, destroys local biodiversity and disrupts micro-ecosystems.Emphasising the purpose of compensatory afforestation, the bench remarked: “New saplings planted far away cannot ‘breathe’ for the residents living in the deforested area, nor do they mitigate the loss of shade or localized temperature regulation for the original ecosystem.”The court further held that the expression “compensatory plantation” necessarily implies restoring the environmental loss suffered by the affected locality. Accordingly, it directed NMC to ensure that whenever permissions for tree felling are granted in future, compensatory plantation should, as far as practicable, be undertaken in the same locality or in adjoining areas.The suo motu PIL originated from a letter sent by Khamla lawyer Dnyandeep Bhongade highlighting large-scale tree cutting proposed for commercial development between Khamla, Sneha Sanvardhak Road and Jaitala Road.KEY TAKEAWAYS:HC disposed of the suo motu PIL on London Street tree fellingNMC cannot permit tree felling on Plot No. 3 without environmental clearanceDeveloper’s undertakings on compensatory plantation acceptedAdditional compensatory trees must be planted before processing permission for Plot No. 3Compensatory plantation should preferably be in the same or adjoining localityDistant plantations cannot adequately compensate for local environmental lossNMC told to follow the locality-based afforestation principle in future tree-felling permissions
