MP High Court Restrains State From Felling Trees In Nursery On Land Allotted For Proposed Construction Of Administrative Buildings
The Madhya Pradesh High Court in an interim order restrained the State Government from cutting or replanting trees claimed to be growing over land having a nursery in Mandla district, which has been allotted to construct administrative buildings. The court was hearing a PIL where the petitioner has challenged an October 1, 2024 order of District Collector, Mandla, claiming that a land...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court in an interim order restrained the State Government from cutting or replanting trees claimed to be growing over land having a nursery in Mandla district, which has been allotted to construct administrative buildings.
The court was hearing a PIL where the petitioner has challenged an October 1, 2024 order of District Collector, Mandla, claiming that a land having total area of 293588 square feet which has a nursery since 1981 having approx 10,000 fruit-trees, was transferred for construction of a new Joint District Office and the office of the Superintendent of Police.
Issuing notice on the PIL, a division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf in its order said:
"In the meantime, it is directed that no tree shall be cut or re-transplanted without the leave of this Court".
As per the plea filed by represented by Advocate DK Tiwari, that in return for the transfer of the land in question, the nursery–wherein trees were grown under a government scheme–was granted land in Village Gazipur which is 15 km away.
During the hearing Tiwari argued that approximately ten thousand fruit bearing trees of age up to 20-30 years are sought to be cut or re-located.
Meanwhile Additional Advocate General Nilesh Yadav appearing for the State on instructions submitted that the proposed construction, would only affect about 18 trees and not 10,000 trees as claimed by the petitioner. The AAG further sought time from the court to submit the "site plan of the area as well as the plan of the proposed construction".
The plea seeks that the Collector's order be quashed; in the interim the plea seeks that pending a final decision the effect of the Collector's order be stayed.
The matter is listed on July 14.
Case Title: Abdul Gaffar Quareshi v State of Madhya Pradesh (WP No. 19722 of 2025)
Counsel For Petitioner: Advocate DK Tiwari
Counsel For State: Additional Advocate General Nilesh Yadav