Supreme Court Stays Tree Felling in Hyderabad's KBR National Park Eco-Sensitive Zone

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed tree felling in the eco-sensitive zone surrounding the Kasu Brahmananda Reddy (KBR) National Park in Hyderabad, while issuing notice on a plea challenging the move to cut trees for road development.

The Court ordered that there should be no tree felling within 25 to 35 metres eco-sensitive zone around the part.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed the interim direction while hearing a petition filed by Kaajal Maheshwari, who challenged the Telangana High Court's refusal to grant interim relief.

The petitioner challenged the reduction of the eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) around KBR National Park to a width ranging from 3 metres to 29.8 metres, contending that such a narrow buffer defeats the very purpose of an ESZ as a “shock absorber” for a protected area.

The plea states that KBR National Park, notified under Section 35 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, is an ecologically sensitive urban forest and one of Hyderabad's principal green lungs. It further alleges that the original proposal for an eco-sensitive buffer of 25 to 35 metres was drastically reduced to accommodate infrastructure projects, particularly the Strategic Road Development Plan (SRDP).

The special leave petition has been filed assailing the Telangana High Court's interim order dated March 31, 2026 in a pending public interest litigation.

According to the petition, the High Court was informed that unregulated construction activity was continuing in and around the KBR National Park and that urgent intervention was required to prevent irreversible ecological damage. However, instead of granting interim relief, the High Court adjourned the matter to May 5, directing the petitioners to undertake research on what activities are permissible, regulated, or restricted in the eco-sensitive zone.

The petitioner contend that between 2012 and 2015, the proposal was to create an eco-sensitive buffer zone of 25 to 35 metres around the park, including the HMDA-developed green buffer area surrounding it. However, this proposal was allegedly diluted over time at the instance of the State government to facilitate road and infrastructure projects.

The final notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change on October 27, 2020 fixed the eco-sensitive zone at a width varying between 3 metres and 29.8 metres around the park boundary.

The petition challenges this reduction as arbitrary, irrational and contrary to the purpose of eco-sensitive zones, which are intended to function as ecological “shock absorbers” protecting national parks and wildlife habitats from disruptive external activity.

According to the plea, the reduction was not based on any scientific ecological assessment but was instead driven by infrastructure considerations, including the avoidance of land acquisition costs.

The petition also alleges procedural irregularities in the decision-making process. It claims that although public objections were received and over 19,000 persons had signed a petition opposing the dilution of environmental protections, these concerns were not meaningfully addressed. The petition further alleges that the State falsely represented that a public hearing had been conducted before the finalisation of the notification.

Senior Advocate K Vivek Reddy, Adv Mithun Shashank, AoR Manish Tiwari appeared for the petitioner.

Case : Kaajal Maheshwari v. State of Telangana | SLP(C) No. 17054/2026