Jharkhand HC Stays Felling of 13,681 Full-Grown Trees for Chatra Bypass Road, Orders Union Ministries to Respond
Justice Ananda Sen halts tree-felling for an NH-99 and NH-100 bypass near Chatra, directing the Environment and Road Transport ministries to file counter-affidavits within six weeks.
The High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi has stayed all construction work on a proposed bypass road near Chatra town that would require the felling of 13,681 full-grown trees, including trees in forest areas. Justice Ananda Sen, sitting singly, passed the interim order on 3 September 2026 in Suresh Sao v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors., W.P.(C) No. 4394 of 2023. The court simultaneously directed the petitioner to implead the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highway as respondents, and gave those ministries six weeks to file counter-affidavits. The order leaves open the possibility of agencies revisiting the alignment of the road so as to reduce the ecological toll.
The Bypass Project and the Petitioner’s Grievance
The construction at issue is a bypass road along Chatra town connecting NH-99 (New NH-22) and NH-100 (New NH-522). The petitioner, Suresh Sao, sought a direction requiring the respondents to consider diverting the scheduled road alignment from its proposed layout. His case was that a diversion of the alignment could save approximately 300 full-grown trees standing on land he claims to own.
The court noted that the question of whether the land belongs to the petitioner would be examined separately at a later stage. At this point, the ecological dimension of the project took centre stage.
State Discloses 13,681 Trees Must Be Cut
On a previous date, the court had directed the respondents to inspect the site and report how many trees would need to be felled under the present alignment, and whether any diversion was feasible to save them. An interim order restraining construction over the area was also passed at that stage.
When the matter came up on 3 September 2026, counsel for the State, appearing as Senior Counsel IV on instructions from the Executive Engineer, informed the court that 13,681 full-grown trees — including trees within the forest area — would need to be cut down under the present alignment. This figure came from a communication dated 2 September 2026 from the Executive Engineer, NH Division, Hazaribagh, which was placed on record.
The Court’s Reasoning on Ecology and Irreversibility
Justice Sen treated the disclosed number as the central concern. The court observed that 13,681 full-grown trees is not a small number, and that cutting full-grown trees in forest areas — or even outside them — on such a scale has direct consequences for ecology and environment.
The order drew a distinction between a standing forest and the result of compensatory afforestation. The court reasoned that even large-scale planting of saplings cannot substitute the existing ecosystem because it takes more than a hundred years for planted saplings to mature into full-grown trees. During that gap, the damage to ecology and the wider environment is irreparable.
The court connected this to the increasing frequency of natural disasters, observing that most of them are triggered by human action. It described full-grown trees not merely as a canopy but as “the lungs, which cannot be allowed to be destroyed.” The order used the phrase “developmental disasters” to characterise large-scale tree-felling carried out in the name of development, and said such disasters must be minimised wherever possible.
On the purpose served by the bypass, the court weighed it against the ecological cost. The order recorded that to achieve the purpose of travelling a shorter distance by a few miles, the forest, flora, fauna, and wildlife were being destroyed. The court said the time had come to consider travelling a few extra miles rather than permitting indiscriminate felling of full-grown trees on a large scale.
The judgment also framed the issue as one of intergenerational responsibility, stating that the present generation is only the custodian of the environment and that any solution must account for future generations, not just the present one.
Impleadment of Union Ministries
Given the scale of tree-felling identified by the Executive Engineer’s communication, Justice Sen directed the petitioner to implead two Union of India ministries as respondents Nos. 7 and 8 in the writ petition: the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highway.
Mr. Prashant Pallav, Additional Solicitor General of India, was present in court and accepted notice on behalf of the Union of India. Both newly added respondents were directed to file counter-affidavits within six weeks of the order.
Outcome
The court directed that none of the 13,681 identified trees shall be cut until further orders. Any construction of the proposed bypass road that requires cutting those trees is stayed. However, the order expressly permits the concerned agencies to revisit the question of re-aligning the road in the interim.
The matter is listed for hearing after the counter-affidavits are filed. Copies of the order were directed to be communicated to the ASGI and the State Counsel.