Madras HC Directs Building Owners/Occupiers To Remove Dangerous Peepal Tree; Corporation To Step In If They Fail

The petitioner challenged a notice issued by the Regional Deputy Commissioner (North), Chennai, under Section 136 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, concerning a Peepal tree alleged to be dangerous. He also sought consideration of his representations and removal of the tree after a site inspection and hearing

Pursuant to an interim order, an Engineer’s report was obtained; it stated that the tree was in a dangerous position and should be removed at the earliest

Section 136(2) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 empowers the Commissioner, where satisfied that a tree is in a ruinous or dangerous condition within a municipal area, to order its removal forthwith

Under Section 136(4), the cost of removal may be recovered from the owners or occupiers where the Corporation undertakes the removal after their failure to comply

The Engineer’s report obtained pursuant to the Court’s interim order assessed the Peepal tree as dangerous and recommended its earliest removal

Applying Section 136(2), the Court treated that assessment as establishing the basis for removal and directed the owners or occupiers to remove the tree in the presence of Corporation officials. The Corporation was to arrange the date and time and, if the owners or occupiers failed to act within the stipulated period, remove the tree and recover the costs under Section 136(4)

The exercise was to be completed within four weeks of receipt of the order. No costs were ordered, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed