Karnataka HC seeks clarity on tree cutting at Lalbagh for Rs 19,000 cr Twin Tunnel road

Bench asks State government to confirm plans by Tuesday amid public interest litigations over environmental compliance

The Karnataka High Court on Saturday directed the State government to inform by Tuesday whether it intends to cut trees inside Lalbagh Botanical Garden for the proposed Bangalore Twin Tunnel Road. The matter arose during hearings of two public interest litigations filed by Dr Adikesavalu Ravindra and Prakash Belawadi, highlighting concerns that Bengaluru’s trees are under threat.

Also Read:Bengaluru auto-rickshaw fare scam: Meter shows ₹112 for halfway trip

Advocate Tejasvi Surya, representing petitioner Belawadi, pointed out that nearly 6.5 acres in Lalbagh have been demarcated, restricting public access, and noted the presence of a rock formation. The court asked government advocate Niloufer Akbar to verify whether tree felling was part of the project. The government requested time to provide instructions and is set to submit its response on October 28.

The bench also issued notices to respondents in Belawadi’s petition, emphasizing the need for compliance with environmental laws. The petition raises questions about the absence of an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) and seeks to ensure all legal provisions are followed.

The twin tunnel road, proposed as an underground corridor from Hebbal to Silk Board at an estimated cost of Rs 19,000 crore, is presented as a solution to Bengaluru’s traffic woes. The plea by Dr Ravindra and others seeks to quash the tender notification dated July 14, 2025, along with all subsequent steps including pre-bid proceedings, bid submission, evaluation, and issuance of the letter of award.

Also Read:Indian-Origin New Yorker arrested for $50,000 fraud after moonlighting as contractor while on State job

The petition also challenges the feasibility study (December 2024), the detailed project report, and the revised DPR (February 2025), citing non-compliance with legal standards, internal inconsistencies, and lack of application of mind. It further disputes the November 26, 2024, letter by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority claiming prior environmental clearance is not required.

The petition requests a halt to the project until mandatory steps are completed, including conducting an EIA, preparing underground road mobility planning, listing acquisition costs, mapping existing utilities and drainage lines, and obtaining all necessary permissions. The project cannot proceed without fulfilling these conditions.