Trees cannot be felled merely to protect buildings or commercial activities: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has directed the State government to ensure that trees on roadsides are not felled merely because they obstruct commercial buildings [Musthafa & Ors. v. State of Kerala]..Justice PV Kunhikrishnan stressed that there ought to be proper reasons to fell trees such as the possibility of putting the public in danger. The single-judge, therefore, directed the Chief Secretary of the State to issue necessary orders to ensure compliance with a Government Order dated February 10, 2010 which regulates the felling and disposal of trees on government lands."The State of Kerala should see that no request to cut and remove trees on the roadsides of the State can be permitted without sufficient reasons. Trees give cool shades, pure oxygen and shelter to birds and animals...The Chief Secretary of the State should issue necessary orders to see that no trees on the roadsides of the State are cut and removed merely for the reason that it obstructs commercial activities or shade adjacent buildings. The trees can be cut and removed only if the same is in such a damaged condition and it is dangerous to the life of the people because of its damage," the judgment stated.."Cutting trees without any reason is nothing but a massacre of the nature and environment of our motherland."Kerala High Court.At the outset of the judgment, Justice Kunhikrishnan also quoted a poem by the late Sugathakumari teacher, a renowned poet and activist..The judge translated it to English as follows:Let us plant a sapling for our mother, Let us plant a sapling for our little ones, Let us plant a sapling for a hundred birds, Let us plant a sapling for a better tomorrow, It is planted for breath, It is planted with gratitude for rainfall, For beauty, for shades, for honey like fruits, Let us plant hundreds of saplings.."Every citizen of this country should remember these words of Sugathakumari teacher who lived for the nature and the environment, whenever they take an axe to cut and remove trees. Cutting trees without any reason is nothing but a massacre of the nature and environment of our motherland," the Court added..The judgment was rendered on a petition moved by the owners of a commercial building against an order rejecting their application for cutting and removing trees near their building.The petitioners said that the trees ought to be felled and removed as they posed a danger to the public and also obstructed the view to their building.They submitted that officials of the Public Works Department had agreed with the petitioners after they inspected the property. The officials also requested the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Social Forestry Division, for permission to cut and remove the trees.However, the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Social Forestry Division rejected their request for felling the trees, stating that the trees are beneficial to the local public and posed no threat to them.This prompted the petitioners approached the High Court with the present petition. .They raised contentions regarding the trouble caused by the trees and added that they were ready to plant substitute trees on their property, all at their own expense. The Assistant Conservator, however, maintained that the trees are extremely beneficial and pointed out that there was a huge protest by the public against cutting the trees. .The Court was convinced by the statement of the Assistant Conservator. It opined that even if the branches of the tree were leaning dangerously, just the branches can be trimmed off instead of felling the entire tree. Noting the disparity between the findings of the Assistant Conservator and the report of the PWD officials, the Court directed the State government to take action against the officials if it finds any dereliction of duty on their part."The duty of the PWD is to protect the trees standing on the roadside and not to destroy the same," the Court added..Finding no merit in the petitioners' case, the Court dismissed their plea."To protect a building or to protect a commercial activity of a citizen, the trees cannot be cut and removed. There are instances where trees are protected by maintaining the trees inside the construction. We should appreciate such initiatives. Here is a case where the petitioners want to cut and remove the trees for getting tenants to their commercial building. This cannot be allowed," the Court ruled. .The petitioners were represented by advocate P Jayaram. Special Government Pleader Sangeeth CU appeared for the State. .[Read Judgment]