NGT Orders Developer to Pay ₹40L and Halt Illegal Tree and Hill Cutting in Khandala

4 March 2017 – Stressing that “unauthorized tree cutting as well as hill cutting is an offense to the environment,” the National Green Tribunal’s Pune bench has directed Mumbai-based Vikas Developers not to illegally cut trees on a hilly plot in Khandala and to deposit ₹40 lakh with the Lonavala Municipal Council for restoring the hill.

The builder illegally cut the hillside and felled trees to make an illegal road without permission from the municipal council, said prominent entrepreneur Nanik Rupani and businessman Ashish Vaid in an application to the NGT in 2015. Both Rupani and Vaid are members of Vikas Valley Cooperative Housing Society, which comprises plots and bungalows in Khandala constructed by Vikas Developers, a proprietary concern of the Madan Lal Gupta Family Trust between 1892–2004.

Restitution of the Environment

Their plea, argued by Advocate Aditya Pratap, sought “restitution of the environment to its original state.” Section 20 of the NGT Act imposes the “polluter pays” principle, under which a person who damages the environment must restore it to its original state and is liable to pay a penalty.

The developer, through its counsel P D Dalvi, denied any wrongdoing or illegality. He also questioned the timing of the application, stating that it was filed “with ulterior motives” and included falsehoods about a road when steps were already in existence at the site. He further claimed that the application was barred by the law of limitation.

NGT’s Findings

A bench of Justice U D Salvi and expert member Ranjan Chatterjee at the NGT’s western zone bench in Pune heard the parties, the municipal council, and also relied on a report by a consultancy firm that visited the site.

The NGT said, “We have before us a clear case of tree cutting and hill cutting, which occurred in or around December 2014 for the construction of a road connecting Plot No. 47 to Plot No. 14 in Vikas Valley. The facts have been made vivid with photographs and Google imagery. The Google imagery reveals that the area in question showed the existence of trees and vegetation in December 2013, but the vegetation was lost after a road-like area was created in January 2015.”

Restitution of Environment Not Time-Barred

The plea was not time-barred, the tribunal also held. More importantly, the NGT in its order stated, “For seeking restitution of the environment, it is not necessary that the applicant has to be a victim of pollution or other environmental damage. They only have to show that the environment requires restitution.”