Rana Surong v Government of Bangladesh and Others

In this case, an appeal was preferred by the appellant, Rana Surong against the judgment of the High Court Division of discharging the writ petition challenging the action taken by the respondent, the Government of Bangladesh to chop off 2096 trees in a tea estate acquired by the Government.

Background
The main essence of the case was the Government of Bangladesh acquired the Jhemai Tea Estate and leased out the Tea Estate to Kedarpur Tea Company Limited for different periods of time through the extension of the lease. For the expansion of the Tea Estate, a decision was taken to chop off 2096 trees which were mentioned in the lease agreement and subsequent permission was taken from the concerned authorities as per the law. A writ petition was filed against the decision taken by the respondent before the High Court Division whereby the Court, in its judgment discharged the writ petition. Following that, the writ petitioners preferred an appeal before the Appellate Division.

Relevant Law and Principles

 * Constitution of Bangladesh - Article 18A (Protection the natural resources, biodiversity, wetlands, forests, and wildlife)
 * Principle of Sustainable Development

Ruling
With regard to appeal preferred against the judgment of the High Court Division, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh held that the decision of chopping down the trees within the premises of the tea estate was within the lease agreement and prior permission was taken from the concerned authorities for conducting the action as per the requirement of the law. Furthermore, the court, by observing Article 18A of the Constitution and other legal obligations held that the preservation of ecology and environment, based on the principle of sustainable development to reconcile the conflicting interest of development with the preservation of a healthy environment has been recognized as an essence of the right of life. Moreover, the Court also opined that the tea gardens play an important role in the photosynthesis process and the expansion of the tea estate would further help to increase the emission of oxygen in the atmosphere and absorbing carbon dioxide.

In conclusion, the court held that the respondent may be allowed to proceed with the expansion plan of the tea estate however, it directed the concerned authorities to impose certain terms and conditions of not cutting immature trees, planting two saplings in the suitable place of the tea estate before cutting down each tree and would be entitled to cut down matured trees aging three years in the presence of the concerned authorities. Subsequently, the appeal was disposed of.