'Show Us A Plan': MP High Court Asks State To Inform On Nature, Age & Girth Of Trees Proposed For Compensatory Plantation

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Wednesday (December 17), directed the State to file a 'better affidavit' indicating the exact nature, age, girth and location where trees would be planted as part of compensatory plantation for the trees that have been felled.

In doing so, the division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf clarified that "the further cutting of trees, pruning cutting of trees in the State of Madhya Pradesh shall be strictly in accordance with the permission, if any, granted, prior permission if any, granted by the National Green Tribunal, by the committee constituted by the National Green Tribunal and the concerned tree officer".

These observations were made in a suo motu petition initiated based on a Times of India report stating that the Public Works Department (PWD) had allegedly felled 488 trees without taking the requisite permissions.

The report further noted that the Central Bench of NGT had directed the government to constitute a committee for considering the felling of trees for the construction of a stadium and road widening at Neelbad, Bhopal.

The proceedings also discussed allegations concerning the felling of 8,000 trees by the Railway Department as well as communication of Vidhan Sabha Building Controller regarding removal of trees obstructing the construction of a residential complex had to be 'shifted', resulting in a large-scale branch and accumulation of wood and sought permission to utilise this wood.

During today's hearing, an interlocutory application was filed raising concerns over felling of approximately 6 lakhs trees in four phases by the Government. Per a report by Bhaskar English, large scale tree cutting project is underway in Singrauli district particularly near the Ghirauli Coal Block, for mining operations allegedly linked to the Adani Group.

However, the bench declined to entertain such grievances, directing that all such applications be filed before the NGT, noting it to be the statutory authority overseeing such matters. It orally stated;

"We have already passed an order. We have not prohibited cutting of trees. But we have said the competent authority has to examine every project, look at it and pass whatever orders are directive orders for protection and preservation. That order is already in place. We don't need to pass orders in respect of every individual case. Otherwise, if somebody wants to raise a construction in his house, he will have to come here. There is already an authority. That authority will look into it".

The State, in compliance of the previous order, submitted a report regarding the Vidhan Sabha Residential project along with details of geo-tagging of each tress proposed to be cut.

However, the court took strong exception to the State's repeated use of the term 'transplantation', orally remarking;

"You see, this is not a transplanted tree. Who can certify this as a transplant? ... You transplant a hand but chop off the fingers and say we have transplanted a hand. That's what this is. Is is a transplant?".

When the State submitted that 242 trees were proposed to be cut and 2440 trees would be planted in another area as compensatory plantation based on expert assessment, the court acknowledged the effort but stressed the need for clear and verifiable plantation plan, stating;

"The exercise is laudable, but you have to show us a plan. That this is the area in which we are going to plant this kind of… Because what you have said is that 244 trees will be cut and 700 trees will be planted around the proposed construction. But show us the location... What is the nature of trees you are going to plant? Where is that area? Do you have this kind of area to plant 700 trees?"

The State identified 9.781 hectares in Gram Chandanpura as the proposed plantation site. However, the court noted that the area was adjacent to a city forest and therefore already in a green zone. It orally stated;

"There is already a forest existing there, so what are you going to do? There is already a forest there. There is a city forest, bhopal part of that area which as it is, green cover".

Further, the court addressed the objections raised by intervenors regarding the functioning of the NGT appointed committee, clarifying that such grievances ought to be raised before the NGT itself as the High Court would not "parallelly monitor the committee".

Thus, the court recorded its order;

"Deputy Advocate General appearing for the state seeks for leave to file a status report as well as a report of an expert body constituted to examine the impact of the trees that have been cut and the compensatory plantation that is proposed to be done. We note that the report does not list out the complete area as well as the number of trees that can be accommodated in the area. Further, we note that the part of the area is adjacent to a forest, a city forest. Where trees are already existing. The respondent is directed to file a better affidavit indicating the nature of trees, exact nature of trees, their age, their girth, which are sought to be planted as a compensation to the trees that have already been cut and are proposed to be cut".

The case is expected to be heard on January 14, 2026.

Case Title: In reference (suo motu) v State

[WP-42565-2025]