The government’s negligence is obvious, as evidenced by the alarming rates of large-scale deforestation that are taking place across the country.
Despite the overwhelming evidence, countless studies, and numerous complaints from environmentalists and concerned citizens alike, the government has yet to take any significant actions to address this pressing issue.
This inaction not only threatens biodiversity and the natural habitat but also contributes to climate change, impacting future generations.
The community remains in a state of disbelief, wondering how such an important matter can be overlooked while the forests, which are vital to our planet’s health, are systematically destroyed.

RTI Appeal Reveals Alleged Illegal Tree Cutting and Contradictory Stance of Forest Department in Mirzapur reflects government negligence.

Activist Yogi M P Singh has filed a second appeal. Consequently, this is part of an ongoing Right to Information (RTI) case before the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission. Furthermore, this action brings to light serious allegations of illegal deforestation.
Notably, these activities occurred in the Drummond Ganj forest range of Mirzapur. As a result, the local Forest Department is under scrutiny.
Additionally, he challenges the information provided by the Divisional Forest Officer (DFO) of Mirzapur. This challenge, in particular, concerns an incident involving an alleged “forest mafia.”
Specifically, they cut green trees using a tractor-trolley. Alarmingly, the tractor-trolley bore the Forest Department’s name.

The case reveals a significant discrepancy. Villagers’ accounts back the media reports. Nonetheless, the forest authorities give the official statement.

Case Reference Details

• Appellant: Yogi M P Singh
• Public Information Officer (PIO): DFO Mirzapur
• Appeal Registration Number: A-20240701554
• File Number: S09/A/1246/2024
• Diary Number: D-301220240092
• Next Hearing Date: 30/12/2024 (For further hearing)
• Hearing Room: S-9, Uttar Pradesh Information Commission

---

The Official Version from the Forest Department implying government negligence to protection of ecology.

In a letter dated July 1, 2024, (reportedly received by the appellant on December 28, 2024), the Regional Forest Officer of Drummond Ganj Range provided the following information regarding the ongoing environmental assessments and wildlife management strategies that have been implemented in the region.
This correspondence detailed the findings of a recent survey conducted to evaluate the health of forest ecosystems, the population dynamics of key species, and the potential impacts of human activities on natural habitats.
Additionally, the officer emphasized the importance of community involvement in conservation efforts and outlined upcoming initiatives aimed at enhancing biodiversity and promoting sustainable practices among local residents.

• The team conducted an investigation about the complaint (RTI Registration PCCFO/R/2024/60008).
• During the inquiry, investigators found that someone had cut down one Chilbil tree in Semra Kalan village.
• The individuals responsible for cutting the tree fled the scene upon the arrival of the Forest Guard, Mr. Abhishek Singh.
• Authorities confiscated a cutter machine left at the scene but later returned it to the owner.
• Officials did not take further action. They cited the reason as the fact that Chilbil and Bamboo (Bons) trees belong to the “exempt species” category. So, they deemed no punitive action necessary according to the rules.

The letter states:

“नियमानुशार उसमें कोई कार्यवाही नहीं की गयी और सम्बन्धित व्यक्ति को उसकी कटर मशीन को वापस कर दिया गया।”

(Translation: “As per rules, no action was taken in it, and the cutter machine was returned to the concerned person.”)

---

The Incident According to Media Reports

The appellant, Yogi M P Singh, highlights a comparison that underscores significant discrepancies in the information presented. Specifically, he contrasts the department’s simplistic explanation, which lacks depth and thoroughness, with a detailed news report published in Hindustan on February 9, 2024. This report, crafted with careful journalistic standards, not only provides a comprehensive analysis of the current situation but also delves into implications for public health. Notably, the report presents a more alarming picture, supported by extensive data and expert opinions, emphasizing the urgent need for action to address the issues highlighted. This stark difference in presentation raises concerns about the reliability of the department’s assessment and reflects the necessity for transparency and accountability in public communications.

• On Friday, February 9, 2024, the “forest mafia” arrived in a tractor-trolley with “Forest Department” written on it. Consequently, their unexpected presence raised concerns among local residents.
• They were cutting down green Chilbil and Bansa (Canal/Serus) trees near Semra Kalan village.
• When questioned by villagers, the culprits claimed they were acting on behalf of the Forest Department.
• Consequently, suspicious villagers informed the Ranger, Virendra Kumar Tiwari, who subsequently dispatched a forest officer to the spot.
• Upon the officer’s arrival, the culprits fled with the tractor-trolley, leaving behind a cutter machine that the police seized.
• In the report, the Ranger confirmed that Chilbil and Serus are exempt species. Still, the Ranger asserted that the tractor-trolley did not belong to the department. A search was underway for those misusing the department’s name.

---

Key Questions Raised in the Appeal

In his appeal to the Information Commission, Yogi M P Singh raised several critical points that underscore the gravity of the situation.
He accused the department of deliberately concealing facts, suggesting that this was a calculated effort to avoid accountability for the extensive large-scale deforestation and widespread corruption that has been plaguing the region.
Singh highlighted the alarming environmental consequences of such actions, which not only threaten the biodiversity of the area but also jeopardize the livelihoods of local communities who depend on these natural resources.
His primary arguments are:

1. Who Gave Permission? Essentially, a farmer requires prior permission to cut a green tree. However, who authorized the large-scale felling of trees using a vehicle brandishing the Forest Department’s name?
2. Accountability for Deforestation: Who will take responsibility for this environmental damage occurring directly under the DFO Mirzapur’s jurisdiction?
3. Protectors or Predators? The appellant questions the very role of the department. He states, “If the protectors will become predators, then who will protect us?” He alleges that the department is running away from providing clear information to hide its complicity or negligence.
4. What are the Rules? The appellant demands that the DFO Mirzapur clarify the official criteria and procedures for the Forest Department. Thus, they want to understand how officials cut green trees in forest areas. Moreover, this incident suggests severe misuse of authority.

The Uttar Pradesh Information Commission will examine the conflicting accounts and consider the serious allegations in the upcoming hearing.

Second appeal filed against Divisional Forest Officer Mirzapur to curb deforestation

Insensitivity of government causing deforestation on large scale

Villagers caught the large-scale deforestation red-handed, while Divisional Forest Officer Mirzapur remained a mute spectator.