Back
2022 Supreme(SC) 1668
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Hima Kohli , JJ.
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai – Appellant
Versus
Worli Koliwada Nakhwa Matsya Vyavasay Sakhari Society Limited & Ors. – Respondents
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 17471-17476 of 2019 (Arising Out of Impugned Final Judgment and Order Dated 16-07-2019 in WPL No. 560 of 2019, PIL No. 39 of 2019, PIL No. 44 of 2019, PIL No. 40 of 2019, PIL No. 36 of 2019 and PIL No. 25 of 2019 Passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay)
Decided On : 30-09-2022
Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG, Mr. Darias Khambata, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Anil Sakhre, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ashish Wad, Advocate, Mr. Harshat Pimple, Advocate, Mrs. Tamali Wad, Advocate, Ms. Sukriti Jaggi, Advocate, Mr. Sidharth Mahajan, Advocate, Mr. Aditya Mehta, Advocate, Mr. Rohan Mirpury, Advocate, Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Mathiranani, Advocate, M/S. J S Wad And Co, Advocate, For the Appellant / Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG, Mr. S.S. Rebello, Advocate, Ms. Suhasini Sen, Advocate, Mr. Bhuvan Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Advocate, Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Madhusmita Bora, Advocate, Mr. Riju Raj Singh Jamwal, Advocate, Mr. Saroj Kumar Padhy, Advocate, Mr. Pawan Kishore Singh, Advocate, Mr. Dipankar Singh, Advocate, Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Mugdha, Advocate, Mr. Satya Mitra, Advocate, Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate, Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, Advocate, Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, Advocate, Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Advocate, ., Mr. Siddharath Dharmadhikari, Advocate, Mr. Bharat Bagla, Advocate, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Advocate, Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, Advocate, Ms. Pinky Behera, Advocate, Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Advocate, Mr. Rishi Agrawala, Advocate, Mr. Amit Thakkar, Advocate, Mr. Ankur Saigal, Advocate, Mr. Rutur Desai, Advocate, Ms. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Advocate, Mr. Shashwat Singh, Advocate, Mr. E. C. Agrawala, Advocate, For the Respondent.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of sustainable development and adherence to CRZ clearance conditions in permitting specific development work allied to the Coastal Road Project.
Headnote:
Coastal Road Project - Modification of Interim Order - CRZ Clearance - [Gardens, Open Spaces, Parks, Cycle Track, Landscaping, Recreation Spaces] - [Condition 6 of CRZ Clearance] - The court allowed certain development work allied to the Coastal Road Project, including gardens, open spaces, parks, cycle track, landscaping, and recreation spaces, subject to strict adherence to CRZ clearance conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai sought modification of an interim order to carry out certain development work allied to the Coastal Road Project, which was initially restrained by the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed specific development work related to the Coastal Road Project, such as gardens, open spaces, parks, cycle track, landscaping, and recreation spaces, while refusing permission for an amusement park. The court emphasized the importance of sustainable development and the need to adhere to CRZ clearance conditions.
Issues: Modification of interim order to permit development work allied to the Coastal Road Project, adherence to CRZ clearance conditions, and rehabilitation of the fishing community.
Ratio Decidendi: The court permitted specific development work allied to the Coastal Road Project, emphasizing the importance of sustainable development and strict adherence to CRZ clearance conditions, including the rehabilitation of the fishing community.
Final Decision: The court allowed certain development work allied to the Coastal Road Project, subject to strict adherence to CRZ clearance conditions, and directed the petitioner to file an affidavit explaining the implementation of the conditions for the rehabilitation of fishermen.
ORDER
IA No. 91674/2022
1. The IA has been moved by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai for modification of the interim order dated 17 December 2019, to permit it to carry out certain work pertaining to the Coastal Road Project details of which are in paragraph 5 of the IA. For clarity of analysis, the contents of paragraph 5 of the IA are extracted below:
'The "other development work " which was not permitted to be carried out includes creation/ construction of gardens, open green spaces, parks, cycle track, landscaping of seaside promenade and road-median, jogging track, butter fly park, amusement parks, underground car parks, recreation spaces etc. on the land required to be reclaimed to ensure smooth alignment of the Coastal Road.'
2. By the interim order of this Court, the judgment of the High Court dated 16 July 2019 was stayed. The petitioner was permitted to reclaim land, build the road (the coastal road as it is described) and secure the road. However, the petitioner was restrained from carrying on any other development work until further orders.
3. By an order dated 7 October 2020, this Court clarified that the judgment of the High Court governed the reclamation of 90 hectares of land. Since the CRZ clearance was for 90 hectares of land, the Court directed that no reclamation and/or development could be carried out beyond the area of 90 hectares until the CRZ clearance of the additional area was received. In this context, the Court observed:
'We are informed that an application has been made for obtaining clearance under CRZ for the excess land and the said application is likely to be processed by the end of this month i.e. October, 2020 and an early decision is likely to be rendered by the respondent - Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA). Till such clearance is obtained, no activity whether by reclamation or development will be carried out in respect of the said area.'
4. The CRZ clearance which was issued on 11 May 2017 for the project was amended on 18 May 2021 to allow reclamation to the extent of 111 hectares. The present position of the work on the Coastal Road Project has been tabulated in paragraph 10 of the IA which is as follows:
'...as of now, 96.40% (about 107 Ha) of reclamation work is completed (footprint area) & Physical progress of the Coastal Road Project achieved is about 55% and tentative schedule date of completion is November, 2023. The progress of the major components of the project is shown in the table.
Sr. No.
Activity
Scope
Achieved
Percentage
1
Reclamation
111 Ha
107 Ha
96.40%
2
Piles
837 Nos
664 Nos
79.33%
3
Seawall
7.47 Km
6.23 Km
83.40%
4
1) Tunnel RHS
2) Tunnel LHS
2.072 km 2.072 km
2.072 km 0.544 km
100% 26.26%'
5. The petitioner has submitted that for carrying out other development work and activities such as landscaping of open space, preparatory steps have to be taken by inviting tenders, framing designs, layouts and methodology and appointing consultants. This preparatory work is anticipated to take about two years. Moreover, it has been submitted that construction of certain parts of the coastal road is required to be undertaken simultaneously with other development work, of which details have been furnished in paragraph 12 of the IA as set out below:
'...For instance, the ramp portion of the road at Haji-Ali Interchange Arm-7 (for the traffic to move from Bandra Worli Sea Link to Worli Naka)and its Reinforced Earth wall are planned to be constructed on the top slab of underground car park at Haji Ali. If this car park is constructed later (after completion of Reinforced Earth wall of Arm 7), it may require dismantling of RE wall, along with associated pavement works and reconstruction them after completion of car park. Due to the construction restriction of Arm-7 as explained above, pedestrian underpass (PUP) under ramp of Arm-7 also cannot be constructed.'
6. Condition 6 of the CRZ clearance dated 11 May 2017 stipulated that:
'(vi) The project proponent will ensure th
