# Bengaluru Residents Challenge Flyover Tree Felling Data in Court

Citizens conduct independent tree surveys after doubting official infrastructure project environmental impact reports.

- **Source:** [Scroll.in](https://scroll.in)
- **Published:** 2026-11-05
- **Topic:** [politics](https://brifing.si/c/politics)
- **Original article:** <https://scroll.in/article/1096814/fearing-that-bengaluru-flyover-project-has-undercounted-trees-to-be-cut-residents-move-court?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=public>
- **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/2af769e0-56e0-4812-a97d-275c70d44ce5

## Mandated Tree Census Delays

In August 2019, the Karnataka High Court ordered a comprehensive tree census under the 1976 Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act. Despite a three-year deadline set by the judiciary, the official count remains incomplete seven years later. This administrative failure has left local residents without accurate data regarding the city's shrinking green cover.

## Infrastructure Projects Threaten Canopy

Bengaluru is currently facing rapid urban expansion through large-scale infrastructure projects, including new flyovers and tunnel roads. These developments frequently require the removal of mature trees, sparking significant concern among local communities. Residents fear that the current pace of construction is permanently damaging the city's remaining environmental assets and urban biodiversity.

## Disputed Official Tree Estimates

The detailed project report for a proposed 13-km flyover between Swami Vivekananda Metro Station and Silk Board Junction estimates 89 trees will be felled. Additionally, 235 trees fall within the construction width. Residents argue these figures are misleading, as they do not clearly distinguish between trees marked for removal and those impacted.

## Citizen-Led Independent Mapping

Skeptical of official government data, the resident welfare network I Change Indiranagar initiated an independent survey. They focused on a 3.5-km stretch of the proposed flyover alignment to verify the actual number of trees at risk. This grassroots effort aims to provide a transparent alternative to the project's contested environmental impact assessment.

## Legal Recourse Against Development

Armed with their own mapping data, residents have approached the court to challenge the project's current trajectory. By highlighting discrepancies between their findings and official reports, they seek to force a re-evaluation of the construction plans. This legal action represents a growing trend of citizen-led oversight in urban infrastructure development projects.

## Construction Width Versus Felling

The core of the dispute lies in the definition of impact zones. While the project report identifies 89 trees for felling, the 235 trees within the construction width remain in a precarious state. Residents contend that the broader construction area often results in collateral damage to trees not explicitly marked for removal.

## Urban Planning Transparency Issues

The lack of a completed government tree census complicates the approval process for major infrastructure corridors. Without baseline data, authorities struggle to justify the environmental cost of projects like the Indiranagar flyover. This information gap forces residents to perform administrative duties themselves to ensure that urban development does not ignore environmental regulations.

## Implications for Future Projects

The outcome of this legal challenge could set a precedent for how infrastructure projects are audited in Bengaluru. If the court validates the residents' independent survey, it may mandate stricter scrutiny for all future elevated corridors. This case underscores the necessity of accurate environmental data in balancing rapid urban growth with preservation.

## Sources covering this story

- https://scroll.in/article/1096814/fearing-that-bengaluru-flyover-project-has-undercounted-trees-to-be-cut-residents-move-court?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=public — 

---

_Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._
