Cuttack: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has ordered an immediate halt to further construction, tree felling and other related activities on a forest land plot at Jubilee Park in Baripada unless prior approval is obtained from the Centre.Citing the possibility of ‘irreparable loss’, the tribunal’s east zone bench, comprising Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi and expert members A Senthil Vel and Ishwar Singh, passed the interim order on Oct 13,restraining the authorities from undertaking any such activities on the disputed forest land.“The district magistrate and collector of Mayurbhanj, divisional forest officer of Baripada and the Mayurbhanj SP are directed to take all requisite steps for ensuring that there is no violation of the order passed by this tribunal,” the order, which was uploaded online on Thursday, stated.Invoking the precautionary principle under Section 20 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, the bench ordered the halt pending further orders and listed the matter for final hearing on Jan 5.The order was passed based on a petition by Kendrapada-based RTI activist Pratap Chandra Mohanty, who alleged that more than 100 trees were illegally felled for a proposed Rs 28-crore urban development project at the park. The project, being executed by the National Federation of Farmers’ Procurement, Processing and Retailing Cooperatives of India Ltd (NACOF) under a Baripada municipality work order, includes landscaping, boating facilities, an island, electrical installations and children’s amenities.The petitioner alleged that felling of trees began on April 2 without obtaining mandatory forest clearance or permission from the divisional forest officer (DFO). He claimed chainsaws were used to cut more than 100 trees and earth-movers were deployed to clear the stumps.The nearly nine-acre project site, spread across four plots, comprising forest land, water bodies and wasteland, is also locally known as ‘Pakhi Vihar’ and reportedly serves as a habitat for thousands of birds. The petition raised concerns over ecological damage and alleged violations of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.Opposing the allegations, the DFO submitted in an affidavit that no illegal felling on a notified or classified forest plot had been established. A field inquiry, the officer added, found no tree felling on the forest land. However, the tribunal said the materials on record established a “prima facie case” for the petitioner and that the “balance of convenience” favoured interim protection “as irreparable loss will be caused if no such interim relief is granted”.