Compensatory Afforestation Must Be Transparent, Timely & Not A Mere Formality: Bombay High Court Issues Sweeping Guidelines For Mangrove Protection

Bombay High Court Mandates Public Portal for Mangrove Felling, Issues Sweeping Reforms for Compensatory Afforestation

Mumbai: In a landmark judgment balancing infrastructure development with ecological preservation, the Bombay High Court has issued a comprehensive set of directives aimed at ensuring transparency and accountability in projects involving the felling of mangroves. While granting permission to the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) to cut 26 mangroves for the Metro Line 5 project, a division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale condemned the "dismal state of affairs" in compensatory afforestation and mandated the creation of a public website to track all such projects.

---

Case Background: Metro Project vs. Mangroves

The case was brought by the MMRDA, which sought the court's permission to clear mangroves for the construction of the Kasheli Depot, essential for the Mumbai Metro Line 5 (Thane-Bhiwandi-Kalyan). This permission was necessitated by a 2018 High Court order in a PIL filed by the Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG), which established that mangroves, protected under the "public trust doctrine," could not be destroyed for any purpose without the court's approval, deeming it necessary for the public good.

While various environmental authorities, including the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA), had granted conditional clearances, they all stipulated that the final nod must come from the High Court.

---

Court's Scrutiny Reveals Systemic Flaws

During the hearings, the court uncovered significant lapses in the existing system for compensatory afforestation. The bench noted a "glaring lack of coordination" and "gross delay" between the grant of permission and the actual execution of plantation drives.

Key observations by the court included:

* Misguided Afforestation: The initial plan for cutting mangroves in Thane involved planting terrestrial trees in Dhule, approximately 345 km away, rather than replanting mangroves in a suitable coastal ecosystem. It was only upon the court's intervention that authorities agreed to plant 370 mangrove saplings in Surai village, Thane.

* Delayed Implementation: An examination of other projects revealed that despite project proponents depositing funds, afforestation was often delayed by years, with some plantations marked as "Proposed in APO 2025-2026" for projects approved as far back as 2019.

* Lack of Transparency: The court expressed serious concern that the entire process, from inviting objections to monitoring plantation survival, was opaque and lacked public accessibility.

* "Eleventh Hour" Petitions: The bench condemned the practice of development authorities approaching the court at the last minute for permissions, citing potential cost escalations to create undue pressure.

In a pivotal excerpt, the court remarked:

"We are of the considered view that where any development project involves the felling of mangroves or diversion of ecologically sensitive land, compensatory afforestation must not remain a formality or a mere post-facto measure. Instead, it must be enforced in a transparent manner, with a parallel condition for project execution."

The court also appointed Advocate Vishal Kanade as an amicus curiae and Court Commissioner, whose report verified the suitability of the new site for mangrove plantation.

---

Landmark Directions for Future Projects

Recognizing the need for systemic reform, the High Court laid down a series of binding general directions applicable to all future projects involving the destruction of mangroves or trees.

Key Mandates Include:

1. Public Transparency Portal: Authorities must launch a dedicated public website within six weeks, providing detailed information for all projects from the last ten years. This portal will feature project approvals, the number and location of trees/mangroves affected, and the real-time status of compensatory plantation, supported by geo-tagged and time-stamped photographs.
2. Proximity in Afforestation: Compensatory afforestation must be carried out in "close proximity to the affected area," moving away from the practice of planting in remote, unconnected districts.
3. No Felling Before Plantation: No tree or mangrove felling can commence until the corresponding afforestation measures have been initiated.
4. Dedicated Funds: Monies deposited by project proponents in the Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAMPA) must be used exclusively for the specific project for which they were collected and not diverted elsewhere.
5. Creation of Land Banks: Authorities are directed to create and earmark land banks suitable for afforestation and mangrove plantation, with details uploaded on the public portal.

---

Final Decision and Implications

The court granted MMRDA permission to proceed with the cutting of 26 mangroves for the Metro Line 5 project, subject to the strict condition that 370-400 mangrove saplings are planted in Surai by September 30, 2025.

This judgment is poised to have a far-reaching impact on how infrastructure projects are executed in ecologically sensitive zones across Maharashtra. By mandating a publicly accessible, data-driven framework for environmental compliance, the High Court has shifted the paradigm from mere procedural clearance to a system of continuous public and judicial oversight, ensuring that the promise of "sustainable development" is not just a phrase on paper but an enforceable reality. The case is scheduled for periodic review every four months to ensure compliance with the court's directions.