‘PIL petition led to 2-year delay in Namma Metro work’

High Court of Karnataka directs Technical Expert Committee to specify exact locations for translocation of trees

June 23, 2021 01:14 am | Updated 10:56 am IST - Bengaluru

One of the issues that came up in court was the procedure followed by BMRCL while removing trees to lay Namma Metro tracks.

One of the issues that came up in court was the procedure followed by BMRCL while removing trees to lay Namma Metro tracks.

The Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation (BMRCL) on Tuesday told the High Court of Karnataka that work on a metro project is running two years behind schedule compared to other metro projects in the country in view of a PIL petition through which the court is examining the process of approval granted for felling trees.

Senior advocate Uday Holla, appearing for BMRCL, told the court that it would cost ₹85 lakh per day for the BMRCL and the delay would impact the project implementation.

When a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Suraj Govindaraj told him that all this was because of not following the procedure for granting permission for felling trees by the competent authorities, Mr. Holla said that metro project is being delayed for ‘no fault of BMRCL’ as it is the Tree Officer/Authority who has to ensure compliance.

These submissions were made during the hearing of the petition filed in 2018 by Dattatraya T. Devare and the Bangalore Environment Trust on the issue of felling of trees for metro and other projects without following the provisions of the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976. The court, after ordering constitution of TEC in April 2019, has been continuously monitoring the process followed by the committee and the State’s authorities in processing application for felling trees.

Translocation

Meanwhile, Bench directed that the Technical Expert Committee (TEC), set up on direction of the court, should specify the exact places for the trees to be translocated after being uprooted for the metro project in the city.

The court also said that the TEC, while identifying the places for translocation, should bear in mind the Section 8(5) of the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976, which prescribes planting trees in the same site or other suitable sites to compensate number of trees felled. As far as possible, translocation should be at the same site where the tree was and if not, in a nearby area, the Bench said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.