Restore green cover cut at Kancha Gachibowli, SC tells Telangana govt
The court granted the State six weeks to submit a revised proposal for its IT infrastructure project with concrete measures to protect wildlife
By Sistla Dakshina Murthy
Restore green cover cut at Kancha Gachibowli, SC tells Telangana govt
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Telangana Government to restore the destroyed green cover in Kancha Gachibowli, stressing that development projects must not come at the cost of the environment.
The court granted the State six weeks to submit a revised proposal for its IT infrastructure project, with concrete measures to protect wildlife, forests and lakes.
SC Bench pushes for āgood proposalā
Hearing the suo motu case on the felling of 1,000 trees in the area, a bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran was informed by senior advocate AM Singhvi that the State was working on a āholisticā plan.
CJI Gavai told the State, āCome up with a good proposal. If you do, we will withdraw all earlier compliments and give you real compliments.ā
Sustainable development is a must
The court made it clear that it is ānot against developmentā but insisted it must follow sustainable principles. Compensatory measures, including large-scale replanting, were deemed essential.
Earlier, the bench had warned State officials of contempt proceedings and possible imprisonment for rushing the felling during a long weekend despite ongoing court proceedings.
Background of the case
The dispute began after the Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (TGIIC) moved to alienate 400 acres of green land in Kancha Gachibowli for IT development.
The land, acquired in 2012, was officially marked for alienation in 2024, sparking accelerated tree cutting with heavy machinery.
Petitionersā allegations
Petitioners argued that the move violated Supreme Court rulings in TN Godavarman Thirumulpad and Ashok Kumar Sharma, which mandate identification of forest-like areas as per the dictionary meaning.
They also alleged non-compliance with the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, claiming no clearance was obtained. The State countered that the land was classified as āindustrialā and that forest claims relied solely on satellite images.
