Union finance minister Pranab Mukherjee talks to Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj during a function.

In a substantial relief to the Mayawati government over the Noida park honouring dalit icons close to the national capital, the Supreme Court on Friday declared that while the 33.43-hectare land does not fall in a defined forest area, the construction there could not exceed 25 per cent to ensure that the environment of the Okhla bird sanctuary adjacent to it was fully protected.
Noting that over 21,000 migratory birds visit the bird sanctuary every winter, as had been recorded in 2008-09, a “green bench” comprising Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justices Aftab Alam and K.S. Radhakrishnan ordered the appointment of a three-member committee to supervise the unfinished construction in the park to ensure that the UP government does not violate the 25 per cent limit.
The committee will comprise a nominee of the ministry of environment and forests, preferably an ornithologist, a member nominated by the Central empowerment committee on forests appointed by the court and the chairperson of Noida, who will function as member secretary.
Since the UP government had felled over 6,100 trees in the area to set up statues of Mayawati and other dalit icons, the court gave the state government two months to put in place the panel to supervise the unfinished work, but added the rider that “any construction should commence only on completion of the planting of trees” to ensure that 50 per cent of the 33.43 hectare land remained under a green belt.
“The area under hard surface, whether covered, uncovered (including pathways and boundary wall) or of any kind whatsoever must not exceed 25 per cent of the total project area; of the rest, 25 per cent should be used for soft green landscaping and remaining, preferably 50 per cent, must have a thin cover of trees of native variety,” the court ruled.
The verdict came on a PIL by Anand Arya and some other citizens of Noida. UP government counsel and BSP Rajya Sabha MP Satish Chandra Mishra saw it as a “substantial” relief, specially when the petitioner had sought demolition of the entire construction work undertaken so far.
Despite the petitioner’s argument that the entire area was a green belt and should come under the definition of forests, the court did not agree and said the area was not notified as a forest under the Forest Conservation Act.
The court, however, agreed with the petitioners’ stand that the project would have an adverse impact on the Okhla bird sanctuary, but decided not to order demolition after three expert bodies said in their reports that the construction undertaken need not be entirely scrapped, but restricted.
“The expert bodies have given recommendations which allow the competition of the project to certain conditions. On behalf of the UP government, it is unequivocally stated that all conditions laid in the reports are acceptable to the state government in their entirety,” the court said.
These bodies included the expert appraisal committee set up by the Centre, SACON (Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History) based in Hyderabad and the Wildlife Institute of India.
The court was not happy with the MoEF for virtually “abdicating” its responsibility, saying: “We would like to point out that the environment impact studies in this case were not conducted either by the MoEF or any organisation under it, or even by any agency appointed by it.” All three experts’ reports came at the behest of the UP government.
“The court would have been more comfortable if the environment impact studies were made by the MoEF or by any organisation under it or at least by agencies appointed and recommended by it,” the green bench observed.