Supreme Court Mandates Its Prior Permission For Tree Felling Within 5 Kms Of Taj Mahal, No Blanket Exemption For Private Land
The Supreme Court has held that its 2015 direction requiring prior permission of the Court for tree felling in Taj Trapezium Zone will continue to apply for felling of any tree within aerial distance of 5 kms of Taj Mahal. A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order in the MC Mehta case concerning tree cutting and other environment issues in the protected...
The Supreme Court has held that its 2015 direction requiring prior permission of the Court for tree felling in Taj Trapezium Zone will continue to apply for felling of any tree within aerial distance of 5 kms of Taj Mahal.
A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order in the MC Mehta case concerning tree cutting and other environment issues in the protected Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ).
Reiterating its earlier direction dated May 15, 2015, the Court stated that any request to fell trees—even if the number of trees is fewer than 50—within the 5 km radius of the Taj Mahal must be placed before the Supreme Court.
Such applications will be referred to the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) for recommendations before the Court decides on granting permission. “Therefore, order dated 15th May 2015 will continue to operate in case of areas situated within aerial distance of 5 kms form Taj Mahal. Therefore, as far as this area is concerned, no tree felling will be permitted without permission of this court,” the bench said.
For areas within the TTZ but beyond the 5 km distance from the Taj Mahal, the Court said that tree felling can take place only with prior permission of the Divisional Forest Officer (DFO) or the CEC. However, the officer granting such permission must act in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Tree Preservation Act.
Section 7 of the Act requires compensatory plantation of two trees for every tree felled unless specifically exempted. Under section 10, unauthorized tree felling or breach of permission conditions is punishable with imprisonment up to six months or a fine up to one thousand rupees.
The Court directed that the DFO must impose a condition that no tree felling shall be undertaken until all pre-conditions, including compensatory afforestation, are fulfilled. The DFO or CEC must first verify compliance with these conditions. Only thereafter can permission be granted for actual felling or translocation of trees.
The Court carved out a narrow exception to this rule. It said that immediate felling of trees without prior compliance would be allowed only in situations of grave urgency, where delay in action may lead to loss of human life.
“This exception will apply only when there is grave urgency to fell trees in the sense that if action of felling of trees is not immediately undertaken, there may be possibility of loss of human life”, the Court stated.
The Court also asked the CEC to submit a report on whether additional restrictions are necessary to protect two other UNESCO World Heritage Sites in Agra—the Agra Fort and Fatehpur Sikri.
The Court also dismissed an application filed by a trust claiming to promote Agra's development as a modern city with cultural and historical sensitivity. The trust had sought relaxation of the requirement for prior permission to cut trees on private/non-forest land.
Advocate Kishan Chand Jain for the trust argued that this would facilitate agro-farming and farming-related growth, proposing a registration system for trees and for individuals engaged in felling.
The Court rejected the plea, stating that the applicant really wanted to obtain a blanket exemption for felling trees on non-forest land under the guise of agro-farming.
“In substance what the applicant wants is a blanket order permitting felling of trees on non-forest land as a part of so-called agro-farming. If we grant this relief, the orders which this court has been passing from 1984 will be completely frustrated. This will give licence to people to fell trees or to fell fully grown trees without any permission that will adversely affect the environment in TTZ area. Therefore the prayers sought are completely contradictory to the object of developing Agra as a modern city”, the Court held.
The Court concluded that by filing such applications the applicant is not helping the cause of development of Agra as a modern city.
Background
The Court's earlier recalled its December 11, 2019 order, which had removed the requirement of seeking prior permission to fell trees on private and non-forest lands within the TTZ. The recall was prompted by concerns that the earlier order might have been passed under a misunderstanding.
The Court noted that although the application underlying the December 2019 order sought promotion of agro-forestry, one of its prayer clauses had in fact sought a broader modification of the 2015 order requiring prior permission. The Court observed that the application did not explain what agro-forestry meant, nor did it provide material supporting its proposals. It accordingly recalled the 2019 order.
On March 25, 2025, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati suggested that tree felling involving fewer than 50 trees within TTZ could be allowed without approaching the Court, based on the direction issued by the Court on December 19, 2024, in another writ petition governing tree felling in Delhi apart from TTZ area.
In that order, the Court had held that permission granted by Tree Officers under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994 to fell more than 49 trees cannot be acted upon without approval from the CEC.
The Court said it would consider the suggestion, but in the meantime the complete embargo on felling trees without prior permission for lands adjacent to the Taj Mahal will continue.
Now, by its latest order, the Court has made it clear that its prior approval is required to fell even less than 50 trees, if the trees fall within aerial distance of 5 kms from the Taj Mahal.
Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13381/1984
Case Title – MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.