BENGALURU: The High Court of Karnataka on Wednesday passed an interim order against cutting or damaging trees on over eight acres of land at Cantonment, where the proposed suburban railway project is supposed to come up.
A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Poonacha passed the order after hearing a public interest litigation filed by former MLA AT Ramaswamy and three others.
The bench issued a notice to the state, Centre, Karnataka Biodiversity Board, the tree officer, and others.
Countering the apprehension expressed by the counsel for petitioners over the move to axe trees, the Additional Solicitor General of India (on behalf of the Centre), submitted that the state has rightly withdrawn the notification as it was issued without consulting the Centre. Also, the petition is premature as the application has been made to the tree officer seeking permission to cut trees for the suburban rail project on the land in question, he said.
The petition stated that the land in question is a decades-old ‘green space’. It belongs to the Railways. It is in the heart of Bengaluru and is part of the Cantonment Railway Station, but bifurcated by a road. It is rich in biodiversity and has 371 big trees.
When the matter stood thus, it is shocking to note that the tree officer issued a public notice in newspapers on April 25, inviting objections from the people with regard to an application filed by the Railways for removal of 368 trees.
The notice stated that the commercial development project will come up on the land measuring 34,856 sq mts, which has been leased to a private company.
The petition stated that people not only staged protests against the move to cut trees, but also raised objections to the notice. A public hearing was held later. When the matter stood thus, it is heartening to note that the Minister for Forest, Ecology and Environment of Karnataka had taken a proactive step by taking a decision to declare the land as a biodiversity heritage site under the provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
However, after three months, a decision was taken abruptly through a notification on December 6, 2025, thereby withdrawing the earlier notification issued on September 10 declaring the land as a heritage site.
The petitioners stated that no reasons were given for this action. However, the forest minister stated that the withdrawal is a setback for the state’s conservation efforts.
They termed the decision atrocious and the reasons given absurd. “It is very clear that all is not well with the state, which has taken a retrograde decision, though it is a matter of grave concern, which will have an adverse impact on Bengaluru’s environment,” they alleged.