UGC road project: New report points to excess tree-felling, lack of clearance from Centre

An additional report, submitted to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) by a senior officer of the Forest Survey of India (FSI), has identified several locations along the Upper Ganga Canal, where tree felling had exceeded the 20 metre limit set for the 111km Kanwar Road project, an NGT ruling, put in the public domain on Tuesday, has said.

In this context, the tribunal has directed Uttar Pradesh (UP) chief secretary to get the matter verified, and take action against those responsible.

The additional report, filed by the joint director of FSI, also said the Upper Ganga Canal road project did not have the mandatory final approval from the Union environment ministry, thus making any tree felling, irrespective of the width felled, a violation of rules.

The tribunal is currently hearing the matter of the construction of the road, which is proposed through ecologically sensitive areas, after taking suo motu cognizance of a Hindustan Times report, dated February 1, 2024, about how the state government’s forest department gave nod to fell about 112,722 trees and shrubs in the protected forests of three forest divisions — Ghaziabad, Meerut and Muzaffarnagar — to construct two lanes of the road.

Earlier, the tribunal had constituted a joint committee and directed the committee to carry out an inspection of the site and submit a report. The committee submitted its report on January 17 and though it mentioned Meera Iyer, joint director, FSI, as one of the committee members, the report did not contain her signature.

Therefore, the tribunal, on January 20, gave the member the liberty to file a separate response disclosing her stand if it differs from the report of the joint committee.

“Ms Meera Iyer has filed a separate response on February 20, stating that the Forest Survey of India has identified several locations where tree felling had exceeded 20 metres. She has also enclosed the photographs...showing the position of the stretch in 2022 and satellite image of May 2024, disclosing that trees beyond 20 metres have been cut,” the tribunal observed in its order on February 28, uploaded on the public domain on March 4.

The additional report also pointed out, “Communication has been received from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change confirming that final approval has not been accorded to the project, as is necessary before any commencement of tree felling operations. Hence, any tree felling, irrespective of the width felled, is not as per rules.”

The report also said a detailed field survey is required to know extent of trees felled till date.

The additional advocate general (AAG), appearing for the UP government, informed the tribunal that a road stretch of about 62km is already constructed for which 17,607 trees have been cut, and after the realignment, another 49.4km stretch is to be constructed, which will result in the felling of 9,417 trees.

During a previous hearing on January 20, the tribunal was informed about a “change in the alignment” for the remaining portion of the Kanwar Marg in order to cut down tree felling to about two-thirds of the originally proposed number.

But the additional report further pointed out that three alternative routes could have been adopted to minimise tree felling. One alternative was through agricultural fields on the right banks of the canal, while two alternatives were through the left banks of the canal, all places with fewer trees.

Sanjay Singh, the nodal officer for the project from the public works department, did not take calls seeking his response.

The tribunal said, “We are of the opinion that once it has been disclosed in the report of such a high officer that in certain stretches felling of trees beyond 20 metres has been done, and satellite images have been enclosed, then, the competent authority of the state must verify it, ascertain its correctness and if illegal felling of trees beyond 20 metres has taken place, then take appropriate action against those who are responsible for such illegal felling of trees.”

In this context, the tribunal directed the chief secretary “to ensure compliance of the above directions through a competent officer.”