HYDERABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday stayed tree felling within the eco-sensitive zone surrounding the Kasu Brahmananda Reddy (KBR) National Park and issued notice on a petition challenging the reduction of the buffer area around the protected urban forest.
A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan directed that no tree felling should take place within the 25-35 metre eco-sensitive zone around KBR National Park until further orders. The interim direction came while hearing a special leave petition filed by environmental activist Kaajal Maheshwari against a Telangana High Court order declining interim relief.
The petition challenges the reduction of the eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) around the park to a width ranging from 3 metres to 29.8 metres, arguing that such a narrow buffer defeats the purpose of an ESZ, which is meant to function as an ecological “shock absorber” for protected areas.
KBR National Park, notified under Section 35 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, is regarded as one of Hyderabad’s key green lungs and an ecologically sensitive urban forest. The petition stated that the original proposal between 2012 and 2015 envisaged a 25-35-metre eco-sensitive buffer around the park, including the green belt developed by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA).
However, the plea alleged that the proposal was diluted over time at the instance of the state government to accommodate infrastructure projects, particularly those under the Strategic Road Development Plan (SRDP). The final notification issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) on October 27, 2020, fixed the ESZ at varying widths ranging from 3 metres to 29.8 metres along the park boundary.
The petitioner contended that the reduction was arbitrary, irrational and contrary to the purpose of eco-sensitive zones, alleging that it lacked scientific ecological assessment and was instead guided by infrastructure considerations, including avoiding land acquisition costs.
Activists welcome top court’s interim relief; matter adjourned to July 27
The special leave petition also challenged an interim order passed by the Telangana High Court on March 31, 2026, in a pending public interest litigation.
According to the plea, the high court was informed that unregulated construction activity was continuing in and around KBR National Park and that urgent intervention was required to prevent irreversible ecological damage.
However, instead of granting interim protection, the high court had adjourned the matter until May 5 and directed the petitioners to conduct research on permissible, regulated and prohibited activities within the eco-sensitive zone.
The plea further alleged procedural lapses in the process leading to the final ESZ notification. It claimed that despite public objections and a petition signed by more than 19,000 people opposing the dilution of safeguards, concerns raised by citizens were not meaningfully considered. The petitioner also alleged that the state falsely represented that a public hearing had been conducted before the notification was finalised.
Environmentalist and activist Donthi Narasimha Reddy, who has also been fighting the case, welcomed the Supreme Court’s interim order, saying it reaffirmed the legal necessity of maintaining eco-sensitive zones around national parks, particularly those within cities.
“The Supreme Court has reiterated its own position that eco-sensitive zones are necessary around all national parks, especially urban parks,” Narasimha Reddy told TNIE, adding that civic authorities had allegedly proceeded with tree removal without adequately considering the legal status of the eco-sensitive zone.
He said he hoped the apex court would restore what he described as the sanctity of the eco-sensitive zone and prevent infrastructure activity that could adversely affect the park.
“Today’s order clearly says there should be no tree felling within the eco-sensitive zone. We also expect that no construction activity detrimental to the park will be allowed,” Narasimha Reddy said.
“Even the proposed 25-35-metre buffer around KBR National Park is inadequate. Earlier Supreme Court observations called for a standardised one-kilometre eco-sensitive zone around protected areas, and KBR deserves a much larger protective radius. The park’s role goes far beyond carbon sequestration — it helps maintain Hyderabad’s microclimate and supports groundwater recharge in areas like Jubilee Hills and Banjara Hills.
“Large-scale infrastructure projects around the park, could destabilise the forest’s ecology and eventually affect the habitability of surrounding neighbourhoods. At the same time, Hyderabad’s traffic concerns must be addressed through scientifically informed alternatives. GHMC should undertake ecological studies, conduct public consultations and place all possible alternatives in the public domain before proceeding with any infrastructure works,” Narasimha Reddy said.
The matter has been adjourned to July 27.