The Supreme Court has issued an interim stay on tree-cutting activities in the Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) surrounding Kasu Brahmananda Reddy National Park, restricting such activities within approximately 25–35 metres of the protected area. The order reaffirms the importance of the ESZ as a critical buffer safeguarding Hyderabad’s ecological balance.
A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued the interim direction while hearing a petition filed by Kaajal Maheshwari, who challenged a Telangana High Court decision declining interim relief.
The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate K. Vivek Reddy, has contested the reduction of the ESZ around the national park to a narrow width ranging from three metres to about 29.8 metres in certain stretches. The plea argues that such a reduced buffer defeats the ecological purpose of an ESZ, which is meant to function as a ‘shock absorber’ protecting sensitive forest ecosystems.
According to the petition, the revised ESZ boundaries were not based on any scientific ecological assessment, but were influenced by infrastructure planning considerations, including efforts to avoid land acquisition costs. It also alleges procedural irregularities, including claims that a mandatory public hearing was not properly conducted before finalising the notification.
Also read: Chemists across K'taka to protest against online medicine sale
Environmental activist Kaajal Maheshwari, who is also the petitioner in the ongoing ‘Save KBR’ campaign, warned that reducing the buffer zone would severely endanger the park’s fragile ecosystem. She alleged that the national park is already under pressure from multiple infrastructure projects, including flyovers and underpasses in its vicinity, which together threaten to ‘suffocate’ the green space with pollution, noise, and heat.
Environmental researcher Major Sandeep Khurana (retired) stated that public consultation is a mandatory statutory requirement and not a procedural formality. He added that if such hearings were bypassed or misrepresented, the legal validity of the ESZ notification itself could be called into question.
Former journalist Kingshuk Nag, who has supported environmental campaigns related to the project, said concerns remain over whether large infrastructure components have been split into smaller parts to potentially avoid comprehensive environmental impact assessment requirements. He also referenced earlier legal challenges to related urban infrastructure projects.
Environmental advocate Narasimha Donthi alleged that despite previous judicial directions, tree cutting and excavation activities had continued, warning that incomplete ESZ notification processes could lead to irreversible ecological damage if not properly enforced.
Sustainability expert Sagar Dhara cautioned that the proposed infrastructure projects risk increasing vehicular emissions rather than reducing them, arguing that the destruction of urban green cover undermines Hyderabad’s climate resilience and air quality.
The campaign group urged citizens, civil society organisations, and the media to remain alert to developments, stressing that urban growth should not come at the cost of ecological sustainability.
Follow us
