<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday stressed on adopting less environmentally damaging alternatives to big projects.</p>.<p>It also took an exception to the rules framed by the Union government which stated the road projects upto 100 km would not require Environment Impact Assessment (EIA).</p>.<p>Maintaining that such a provision was not tenable, a bench presided over by Chief Justice of India S A Bobde also said that the court would draw a protocol where governments have to explore a possibility where cost of trees, to be cut, have to be included in the project cost of Railways.</p>.<p>The top court was hearing a plea by NGO 'Association for Protection of Democratic Rights' against felling of trees for constructing railway over ridge and widening of National Highway 112 from Barasat to Petrapole on the Indo-Bangladesh Border in West Bengal.</p>.<p>The petition sought to protect 4,036 trees (including heritage trees aged about 200 years or more and endangered trees) which are to be cut for the road widening project and construction of Railway Over Bridge (ROB).</p>.<p>The court said trees of greater girth can be translocated.</p>.<p>The bench asked advocate Prashant Bhushan to help the court develop the protocol where alternatives, which are less environmentally damaging, are considered.</p>.<p>Bhushan said when such projects are sanctioned, environmental impact assessment is carried out and it is taken into account for giving a environmental clearance.</p>.<p>The court asked the advocate to give it a note on protocol showing provisions of environmental law.</p>.<p>During the hearing, the court also suggested the government should strengthen sea and rail routes instead of roads which required felling of trees.</p>.<p>As per a report by an expert committee-appointed by the court, the value of 300 full grown trees, which are cut 100 years before their natural age, is at least Rs 2.2 billion (Rs 220 crores).</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday stressed on adopting less environmentally damaging alternatives to big projects.</p>.<p>It also took an exception to the rules framed by the Union government which stated the road projects upto 100 km would not require Environment Impact Assessment (EIA).</p>.<p>Maintaining that such a provision was not tenable, a bench presided over by Chief Justice of India S A Bobde also said that the court would draw a protocol where governments have to explore a possibility where cost of trees, to be cut, have to be included in the project cost of Railways.</p>.<p>The top court was hearing a plea by NGO 'Association for Protection of Democratic Rights' against felling of trees for constructing railway over ridge and widening of National Highway 112 from Barasat to Petrapole on the Indo-Bangladesh Border in West Bengal.</p>.<p>The petition sought to protect 4,036 trees (including heritage trees aged about 200 years or more and endangered trees) which are to be cut for the road widening project and construction of Railway Over Bridge (ROB).</p>.<p>The court said trees of greater girth can be translocated.</p>.<p>The bench asked advocate Prashant Bhushan to help the court develop the protocol where alternatives, which are less environmentally damaging, are considered.</p>.<p>Bhushan said when such projects are sanctioned, environmental impact assessment is carried out and it is taken into account for giving a environmental clearance.</p>.<p>The court asked the advocate to give it a note on protocol showing provisions of environmental law.</p>.<p>During the hearing, the court also suggested the government should strengthen sea and rail routes instead of roads which required felling of trees.</p>.<p>As per a report by an expert committee-appointed by the court, the value of 300 full grown trees, which are cut 100 years before their natural age, is at least Rs 2.2 billion (Rs 220 crores).</p>
