NGT Flags Illegal Tree Felling, Construction Without EC in Omaxe Dwarka Project; Orders Probe and Action

April 22, 2026 : The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has come down firmly on alleged environmental violations in the “Omaxe State” project at Sector 19B, Dwarka, holding that construction activities were undertaken without mandatory Environmental Clearance (EC) and that illegal tree felling had occurred at the site.

In its order dated April 22, 2026, in Renu Bala vs. MoEF&CC & Ors. (Original Application No. 137/2025), a Bench comprising Justice Prakash Shrivastava (Chairperson) and Dr. A. Senthil Vel (Expert Member) refused to dismiss the plea on locus grounds, noting that the case raised “substantial issue of violation of environmental norms,” warranting examination on merits.

No Environmental Clearance, ‘Deemed EC’ Argument Rejected

The Tribunal recorded an undisputed position that no Environmental Clearance had been granted to the project, which falls under Category 8(b) of the EIA Notification, 2006, requiring prior approval before any construction or land preparation.

Rejecting the developer’s reliance on “deemed clearance” under Clause 8(iii), the Tribunal clarified that such a concept applies only in limited circumstances where all statutory requirements are strictly complied with. In the present case, the application remained incomplete, with additional documents (ADS) sought by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) still pending.

The Tribunal emphasized that there is no legal provision permitting authorities to grant or recommend “deemed clearance” in violation of environmental norms, and compliance with statutory conditions remains mandatory irrespective of procedural delays.

Conditional EAC Recommendation Violated

The Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) had recommended the project subject to specific conditions, including a clear stipulation that no tree cutting would take place without prior permission from the Forest Department.

However, the Tribunal found that no such permission had been obtained. On the contrary, material on record—including satellite imagery—indicated that tree felling had already taken place, in breach of both statutory requirements and EAC conditions.

Illegal Construction Beyond Permissible Limits

The project proponent argued that only temporary structures permissible under the Office Memorandum dated March 29, 2022 had been erected. The Tribunal rejected this claim, relying on photographic evidence showing excavation and construction of concrete columns.

It held that such activities clearly constituted permanent construction and could not be justified as measures for securing project land, thereby violating the EIA Notification, 2006.

Findings on Tree Felling

The Tribunal noted that approximately 2,191 trees existed at the site, with nearly 2,000 proposed to be cut. Despite the absence of requisite permissions, comparative satellite imagery showed that tree felling had already occurred.

The Bench unequivocally held that “illegal felling of trees has taken place at the project site,” and observed that subsequent approvals could not legitimize earlier violations.

Directions Issued

Taking note of the violations, the Tribunal issued the following key directions:

• The Tree Officer/DFO was directed to conduct a site inspection, assess the extent of illegal tree felling using satellite imagery, and initiate remedial and punitive action within eight weeks.
• The MoEF&CC was directed to decide the pending EC application in accordance with law, factoring in the violations identified.
• The Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) was instructed to assess environmental violations, including unauthorized construction, and impose environmental compensation where warranted.
• Authorities were directed to submit an action taken report within three months.

The Original Application was disposed of with these directions, with liberty to revisit the matter based on compliance reports.

Appearances:
Mr. Ravi Agrawal for the Applicant; Mr. Sanjay Upadhyay, Senior Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 7 & 8; counsel for MoEF&CC, DDA, DPCC and other respondents.