Tree felling caught between two stools

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, August 9

Dead tree felling in Chandigarh, it seems, is rooted in confusion. Four years after a 20-year-old girl’s leg was amputated after a branch fell on her in Sector 17, the Punjab and Haryana High Court took note of the continuing mix-up between the UT Administration and the Municipal Corporation on the upkeep of trees.

Referring to an assertion by a counsel, Justice Rajan Gupta observed that confusion persisted as some of the trees were maintained by the Administration, while the others by the corporation.

  Justice Gupta also referred to the counsel’s statement that it was unclear whether immediate steps could be taken to cut a tree or its branch in case of exigencies as in the case before the court. 

The Bench was also told that an exercise had been undertaken to identify trees required to be removed at the earliest after outliving their life.It was also informed that an exercise was being undertaken to remove all other public hazards, such as dead trees and potholes, at the earliest. Before parting with the case, the Bench appointed advocate RS Bains as amicus curiae or the friend of the court.

Justice Gupta, on a previous date of hearing, had made it clear the the court’s intent to examine whether a lengthy procedure was required to be followed for removing lifeless trees when safety was an issue. 

Enlarging the scope of the petition, Justice Gupta had also declared that the High Court would examine other safety hazards. The development took place on a petition by Kajal against the Chandigarh Administration. The Bench was told that she visited Sector 17 on September 15, 2013, around 7 pm when the windy weather forced a heavy branch of a dead tree to snap and fall on her, causing severe injuries. She was immediately taken to the Sector 16 government hospital, before being shifted to the trauma centre at the PGI. 

But her right leg below the knee had to be amputated due to torso metatarsal dislocation and other injuries. The Bench was told that the occupant of an SCO, in front of which the tree was located, had submitted a representation way back in May 2013.

He had stated that the dead branch was required to be removed, but the MC had turned a blind eye. Justice Gupta observed that the petitioner was now seeking compensation on the ground that her entire life had been ruined due to the Administration’s failure to act in time.  

The MC, on the other hand, claimed that the trees  could not be cut unless permission from the Adviser was obtained in view of the instructions dated November  12, 1992, and February 23,  1999. 

Steps being taken to axe trees, court told

• The Bench was told that an exercise had been undertaken to identify trees required to be removed at the earliest after outliving their life. It was also informed that an exercise was being undertaken to remove all other public hazards, such as dead trees and potholes, at the earliest.  Before parting with the case, the Bench appointed advocate RS Bains as amicus curiae or the friend of the court.  A 20-year-old girl’s leg was amputated after a branch fell on her in Sector 17.