The Hindu : New Delhi News : Demolish Noida park constructions: Counsel

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Jul 24, 2010
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

New Delhi

New Delhi

Demolish Noida park constructions: Counsel

J. Venkatesan

“Cutting of over 6,000 trees cannot be easily compensated by the State Government”

New Delhi: Contending that the construction in Bhim Rao Ambedkar Park at Noida by the Mayawati Government violated all laws, senior counsel Jayant Bhushan argued in the Supreme Court on Friday that these constructions should be demolished and the forest destroyed should be brought back.

Appearing for the petitioners, counsel submitted before a three-Judge Bench of Chief Justice S. H. Kapadia, Justice Aftab Alam and Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan that the environmental impact of the cutting of over 6,000 trees for this park cannot be easily compensated by the State Government.

‘Misuse of forest land'

Tracing the sequence of events, Mr. Bhushan submitted that the U.P. Government had utilised the forest land for non-forest use by constructing memorials in the 33 hectare area by clearing 6194 well-grown trees.

Mr. Bhushan pointed out that no permission was obtained from the Centre or the Supreme Court for construction of the park, situated less than 50 metres from the Okhla bird sanctuary. The mandatory environment impact assessment was not done. The State Government cannot take the law into its hand, he said.

The Noida authorities should not be allowed to plead fait accompli on ground that a large portion of the work on the project site has already been completed, Mr. Bhushan added.

“The construction will have to be removed and forest cover brought back”, he said.

Quoting Forest Survey of India figures, he said till 2006, 21.77 hectares of land was under tree cover, which had been completely wiped out by the government.

Different reports

He pointed out that initially the Central Empowered Committee in its report had said the land used for the park was not forest land, and no environment clearance was required for it.

Besides, the Ministry said, there was no violation of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, as the notification for the Okhla Bird Sanctuary was yet to be issued.

However, in the subsequent report, the Committee had said that environmental clearance was necessary for the project.

Arguments will continue on July 30.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

New Delhi