Justice Waziri observed that a tree is a living being which must, at least, be given a ‘last look’ and accorded a final inspection before a decision is taken to permit its felling or amputating its live branches.
The Court also examined some pictures furnished by the petitioners and noted that there were “glaring examples of misuse of the generous permission granted under the Guidelines to prune trees/tree branches having a girth upto 15.7 cms”.
“The occasion to the Tree Officer to inspect or assess the health of the trees, the necessity or justification for pruning has been sought to be scuttled and taken away by the Guidelines. What is the scientific methodology employed to measure that the pruning was done only upto a girth 15.7 cms and not beyond, is not known or specified. Evidently, it is a mere guesswork. An estimation. The Guidelines are not a statutory enactment or an amendment of the statute. They cannot abridge the mandate of the statute. Even a Regulation or Rule, which are creatures of a statute cannot limit, undo or transgress the powers, objective and mandate of the statute itself,” the Court observed before setting aside the guidelines under challenge.
Source: Barandbench
