Tree fall incidents: Bombay HC seeks details of alleged gaps in BMC’s de-concretisation drive | Mumbai News
2 min readMumbaiUpdated: Jul 1, 2026 11:05 AM IST
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday asked the petitioners and intervenors in a public interest litigation (PIL) on tree falls to share their findings and suggestions with the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), after an intervenor disputed the civic body’s claims regarding tree de-concretisation across the city.
The HC was hearing an intervention application filed by social activist Sagar Ugale in a PIL by activist Rohit Manohar Joshi and others seeking de-concretisation around the bases of trees in Mumbai and Thane, while raising concerns over deaths and injuries caused by falling trees.
The PIL has sought directions to the civic authorities to formulate a disaster management plan with provisions for compensation and compassionate employment for the families of those killed or injured in incidents involving tree collapses.
The HC had earlier noted that the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act, 1975 provides for the constitution of a Tree Authority in every urban local body for the protection and preservation of trees.
Earlier this month, the BMC had submitted that the petitioners and intervenors could accompany officials of the Garden Department and point out locations where de-concretisation work had not been carried out.
On Tuesday, Ugale disputed the BMC’s claim that only about five per cent of the de-concretisation work remained. He submitted that site inspections found concrete, asphalt, paver blocks, road construction material, and debris still surrounding several trees across the city.
According to the intervention application, inspections of 832 trees across more than 35 roads in seven civic wards, including Malad, Fort, Santacruz and Dahisar, found that 321 trees had inadequate open soil space or improperly constructed tree basins, while 471 trees required further scientific de-concretisation.
Story continues below this ad
A bench led by Justice A.S. Gadkari asked the petitioners and the intervenor to share their findings, grievances, and suggestions with the BMC and posted the matter for further hearing after four weeks.
20
584226
20
20
