MP High Court Exempts Defence, Security Infrastructure Projects From Prior Permission For Cutting Trees
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that its previous order banning the cutting of trees without prior permission will not be applicable in respect to categories of land, specifically exempted under Section 1A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, in a petition filed by the Indian Army. The division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf observed; "Since the...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that its previous order banning the cutting of trees without prior permission will not be applicable in respect to categories of land, specifically exempted under Section 1A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, in a petition filed by the Indian Army.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf observed;
"Since the Forest (Conservation) Act makes an exception interalia with regard to proposed construction of security related infrastructure, we clarify our order dated 26.11.2025 that the said order shall not be applicable in respect of the categories of land, which are specifically exempted in terms of Section 1 A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 as amended by the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023".
For context, the amended Section 1A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 defines land that is covered and exempted by the Act. The Act applies to declared or notified forests and recorded forest land. The Act also specifies that the same does not apply to small roadside or railway side forest land, trees grown out of recorded forest land and strategic and security projects.
The petition was filed on behalf of India Army, asserting that the order of November 26, 2025, banning the cutting of trees without prior permission of the Committee constituted by the National Green Tribunal and the concerned tree officer. The petition argued that construction if secrated related infrastructure is proposed to be constructed, which would violate the aforementioned order.
Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the Indian Army drew attention to Section 1A and 4 of the Act. DSG further produced details to be included in a sealed cover.
Considering the application, the bench clarified that the order would not be applicable to categories of land, specifically exempted under Section 1A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
The aforementioned order was passed in a suo motu petition initiated based on a news report stating that the Public Works Department (PWD) had allegedly felled 488 trees without taking the requisite permissions.
The bench, while relying on the Supreme Court's opinion on the importance of minimising tree felling in public projects, had restrained the State Government from cutting, pruning or transporting trees in the entire State of Madhya Pradesh in any manner without the prior permission of the committee constituted by the NGT and the concerned Tree Officer.
Case Title: Neeraj Garg v Union of India, WP No. 17144 of 2024, WP/26400/2025, WP/42565/2025, WP/46813/2025, WP/3885/2026, WP/26400/2025, WP/42565/2025, WP/46813/2025, WP/3885/2026
For Petitioner: Senior Advocate Aditya Sanghi with Advocates Amalpushp Shroti, H.S. Gupta, B.P. Pathak, Ambikesh K. Shukla and Alka Singh
For State: Government Advocate Anubhav Jain
For Union: Deputy Solicitor General S.M. Guru
For NHAI: Advocate Kavita Ahirwar