Institute of Legal and Management Studies

Amid worsening air pollution in the National Capital, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 11) delivered a crucial verdict aimed at protecting the 'Delhi Ridge', a vital ecological zone in Delhi. Observing that little progress had been made over the past three decades to restore the ridge's natural integrity, the Court directed the Union Government(MoEF & CC) to confer statutory status on the Delhi Ridge Management Board (DRMB) to ensure greater accountability, transparency, and effective governance.

A bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and comprising Justice KV Chandran expressed deep dissatisfaction with the progress made since it first intervened in 1995, noting that despite continuous judicial oversight, the protection of the ecologically critical Aravali extension remains woefully inadequate.

" We are, therefore, of the view that without proper statutory protection, it would not be possible to properly preserve the integrity of the Ridge. We find that the GNCTD has not acted with swiftness in protecting the Ridge. Though this court observed as early as in May, 1996 that the Government has not taken proper steps for conservation of the Ridge, not much has been done even after a lapse of almost three decades therefrom.", the court said adding that of the total identified Ridge area measuring 7,784 hectares, a final notification declaring it as a Reserved Forest under the Indian Forest Act has been issued for only 103.48 hectares, just 1.33%, leaving the remaining area unprotected and vulnerable to rampant encroachments and unauthorized constructions.

“We are, however, of the view that without proper identification or preservation of the Ridge, the integrity of the entire ecology would be compromised. The Ridge acts as the green lungs of the city, especially in the present conditions of increased pollution. We, therefore, find that the DRMB needs to actively work towards protecting and preserving the Delhi Ridge after its due identification.”, the court said, while ordering reconstitution of the DRMB.

The judgment authored by Chief Justice Gavai rejected the Union Government's objection regarding conferment of statutory status to the DRMB, stating that “if the DRMB is given statutory status, its orders can be judicially scrutinized either by the learned NGT under Section 14 of the NGT Act and by this court by way of appeal under Section 22 of the said act or by the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.”

“The MoEF&CC has opposed giving statutory status to the DRMB. It has expressed apprehension that if the Central Government issues a notification, there will be an overlap of other authorities. However, we do not find any substance in the said submission of MoEF&CC. The very purpose of the earlier orders passed by this court and the present judgment is to avoid having multiple authorities considering the issue with regard to the Delhi Ridge. We, therefore, propose to direct the DRMB to be a single-window authority insofar as issues concerning Delhi Ridge are concerned. Like the CEC, if the DRMB is also given a statutory status, it will be in a position to function effectively and also be accountable and answerable.”, the court added.

The Court directed the DRMB's reconstitution, where the functioning of the DRMB would be as under:

a) The Board shall act as a single-window authority insofar as the Delhi Ridge and the Morphological Ridge is concerned;

b) The Board must ensure the preservation of the Delhi Ridge and Morphological Ridge in its pristine glory by removing all encroachments and taking all necessary steps to improve the Ridge;

c) The Board must remove all encroachments in the Delhi Ridge as well as the Morphological Ridge;

d) The Board must duly ensure that the identification process of the Morphological Ridge is complete as per order dated 8th February, 2023 in T.N. Godavarman (supra) and report its compliance, along with comments, if any, to this court;

e) The Board must ensure the protection, scientific management, ecological restoration of the Ridge and the Morphological Ridge including afforestation and habitat conservation;

f) The Board must submit periodic Reports every six months to this court regarding the status of the Ridge and the Morphological Ridge and the compliance of the directions of this court;

g) The Board must act fairly and transparently in discharge of its functions – this would include having a website, provide public notices for hearings in advance, public consultation, and uploading of reports on the website as soon as they are placed before this court or any other Authority; and

h) All authorities in the territory of the NCT of Delhi must act in aid of the discharge of duties of the Board.

Constitution of the Standing Committee in DRMB

“We are also of the considered view that taking into consideration the constitution of the DRMB, it would not be possible for it to regularly function on a day-to-day basis. It will, therefore, be appropriate that the DRMB constitutes a Standing Committee which can look after the day-to-day affairs of the Board…We, however, find that the Standing Committee must consist of experts and technicians who have worked in the field of conservation. We further find that for the purpose of preservation and protection of Delhi Ridge, it is necessary that the Standing Committee should meet regularly.”, the court said.

“The core functions of the DRMB must be directed towards conservation of the existing Ridge Forests and removal of existing encroachments from the Ridge. The very purpose of the DRMB is to preserve the integrity of the Ridge, as a morphological and ecological feature. Therefore, the DRMB should focus on preservation of existing Ridge forests and further improving the areas through scientific conservation measures. The DRMB should also ensure that fragmentation of Ridge Forests is prevented.”, the court added.

Conclusions and Directions

The Court passed the following order:

i. We direct the MoEF&CC to constitute the DRMB by issuing notification under Section 3(3) of the EP Act with the membership as under:

1. Chief Secretary, GNCT of Delhi, Chairman

2. Vice-Chairman, Delhi Development Authority, Member

3. Representative of the Director General of Forests & Special Secretary, MoEF&CC, Government of India, not below the rank of Inspector General of Forests, Member

4. Representative of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Gol (not below the rank of JS), Member

5. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Member

6. Chairman, New Delhi Municipal Council, Member

7. Director General, Central Public Works Department, Government of India, Member

8. Representative of the Commissioner of Police, Delhi (not below the rank of Joint Commissioner), Member

9. Principal Secretary/Secretary (Environment & Forests), GNCTD, Member

10.Principal Secretary/Secretary (Land Revenue), GNCTD, Member

11.Two representatives from NGOs and Civil Societies (to be nominated by GNCT of Delhi), Member

12.Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, GNCTD, Member-Secretary

13.Representative of Central Empowered Committee (CEC), Member

ii. The DRMB on its constitution would constitute a Standing Committee as under:

1. Member of the CEC, Chairperson;

2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, GNCTD;

3. Two Representatives from NGOs and Civil Societies who are already part of the DRMB;

4. Nominee of the Chief Secretary, GNCTD; and

5. Nominee of the Delhi Development Authority. The nominees to be appointed by the Chief Secretary, GNCTD and DDA must be experts in the field of conservation.

“The Member of the CEC who will officially act as the representative to the DRMB is directed to report to this court every three months on proper functioning of the DRMB and the Standing Committee.”, the court further directed.

The Court also appreciated the valuable assistance provided by Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG and Mr. K. Parameshwar, Amicus Curiae ably assisted by Advocates Mr. Mukunda, Ms. Kanti, Mr. Shreenivas Patil and Ms. Raji Gururaj.

Cause Title: IN RE : DELHI RIDGE

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1090

Click here to read/download the order

Appearance:

Amicus Curiae

Mr. K. Parameshwar, Sr. Advocate [A.C.] Mr. Mukunda,Adv. Ms. Kanti,Adv. Mr. Shreenivas Patil,Adv. Ms. Raji Gururaj,Adv. Mr. Harish N. Salve,Sr.Adv. (N.P.) Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Sr.Adv. (N.P.) Ms. Aprajita Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Siddharth Chowdhury,Adv.

Counsel for parties

Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Ms. Suhasini Sen, Adv. Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv. Mr. Baij Nath Patel, Adv. Mr. K. M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Anuj Srinivas Udupa, Adv. Mr. Krishna Kant Dubey, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Adv. Ms. Mrinal Elker Mazumdar, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv. Mr. Mukesh K Verma, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv. Ms. Suhashini Sen, Adv. Mr. Shyam Gopal, Adv. Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nishit Agrawal, AOR Ms. Kanishka Mittal, Adv. Ms. Deepti Rathi, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mrs. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv. Mr. Suhasini Sen, Adv. Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv. Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, AOR