‘This is not sustainable development’: SC slams Telangana govt over tree felling at Kancha Gachibowli

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday criticised the Telangana State government for its hasty deforestation drive in the Kancha Gachibowli area in April this year, observing that clearing forests overnight with bulldozers cannot be defended in the name of sustainable development.

‘Cannot clear jungle overnight’

Hearing the suo motu case related to large-scale tree felling in Gachibowli, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai remarked, “I am myself an advocate for sustainable development, but that doesn’t mean that overnight you should employ 30 bulldozers and clear all the jungle.”

Court proceedings and next hearing

Senior Advocate K Parameshwar, acting as amicus curiae, informed the bench that some private parties intended to respond to the State’s affidavit. The court posted the matter for further hearing on August 13.

Earlier, the bench had warned State officials of contempt proceedings and temporary imprisonment, observing that they misused the long weekend to carry out bulldozing operations in the forest area.

Priority to restoring status quo in wildlife area

The court underscored that restoring the status quo at the site was its first priority. It directed the State’s Wildlife Warden to take immediate measures to protect wildlife affected by the deforestation.

Additionally, the court granted time to the State to file its reply to the Central Empowered Committee’s spot inspection report.

The Debate: IT Project vs Forest Protection

The dispute arose from a government order issued by the Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (TSIIC) proposing to alienate nearly 400 acres of green cover in Kancha Gachibowli for an IT infrastructure project.

Reports of extensive tree felling triggered protests by environmentalists and locals. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitioners argued that the State was flouting two landmark Supreme Court judgments – TN Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India and Ashok Kumar Sharma v. Union of India – which mandated the identification and protection of forests based on their dictionary meaning, irrespective of ownership.

They also contended that no Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was conducted as required under the 2006 EIA Notification.

State’s defence

The Telangana government, however, maintained that the land was classified as ‘industrial land’ and dismissed petitioners’ claims, arguing they were based solely on Google satellite images.

High Court intervention

On April 2, the Telangana High Court had stayed felling of trees on the land until April 3, when the matter was scheduled for hearing. Subsequently, on April 7, it deferred the hearing to April 24 after being informed that the Supreme Court will be hearing the case.