SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J.
In Re: Felling of Trees In Aarey Forest (Maharashtra) – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent
IA No. 169860 of 2022 In Suo Moto Writ (Civil) No. 2 of 2019 with IA Nos. 104736, 104886 of 2022 and 178233 of 2019 In Smw (Civil) No. 2 of 2019, IA No. 105220 of 2022 In SLP (Civil) No. 14933 of 2019 and IA Nos. 107131 and 50314 of 2022 In SLP (Civil) No. 31178 of 2018.
Decided On : 29-11-2022
Interim Relief - Environmental Protection - The Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act 1975 - The judgment discusses the permissions sought and granted for felling trees in Aarey Colony for the Metro Line - 3 project. It also considers the decision of the State Government to allow the work of the Metro Car Depot at Aarey to proceed, and the subsequent request for permission to move the Tree Authority for the felling of 84 trees. The court permits MMRCL to pursue its application before the Tree Authority for the permission to fell 84 trees for the purpose of the ramp, with the Tree Authority having the liberty to take an independent decision on the application and determine any conditions to be imposed.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the permissions sought and granted for felling trees in Aarey Colony for the Metro Line - 3 project. The State Government initially accepted a report recommending the location of the car depot at Aarey, but later changed its view and decided to realign the car depot at Kanjurmarg. The Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs communicated concerns about the proposed integration of two lines at SEEPZ village station and requested the State Government to reconsider its decision to shift the depot of Line-3 from Aarey colony to Kanjurmarg. The State Government subsequently decided to allow the work of the Metro Car Depot at Aarey to proceed.
Finding of the Court:
The court permits MMRCL to pursue its application before the Tree Authority for the permission to fell 84 trees for the purpose of the ramp, with the Tree Authority having the liberty to take an independent decision on the application and determine any conditions to be imposed.
Issues: The main issues revolve around the permissions for felling trees in Aarey Colony for the Metro Line - 3 project, the State Government's decision to allow the work of the Metro Car Depot at Aarey to proceed, and the subsequent request for permission to move the Tree Authority for the felling of 84 trees.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the public interest and the serious dislocation that would be caused if the public investment in the project were disregarded. It also took into account the environmental concerns and the substantial number of trees already felled in the area. The court concluded that MMRCL should be permitted to pursue its application before the Tree Authority for the permission to fell 84 trees for the purpose of the ramp.
Final Decision: The court permits MMRCL to move the Tree Authority for the grant of felling permission for 84 trees, with the Tree Authority having the liberty to take an independent decision on the application and determine any conditions to be imposed. The state government is also permitted to proceed further. The entire batch of petitions is listed for hearing and final decision on 7 February 2023.
JUDGMENT
Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.
On 15 April 2019, this Court, while considering Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No 31178 of 2018, declined to grant interim relief in IA No 33819 of 2019. The reliefs which were sought in the application for interim relief were in the following terms:
"a). stopping all activities being carried out by the Respondent No-4 on the land in question inside Aarey Colony;
b). directing the Respondents to carry out the activities for setting up Metro Car depot at the alternative sites referred to in paragraph 3 of the present application;
c). staying the operation of the observations made at page 92 of the impugned order to the effect that Aarey Milk Colony area cannot be referred to as forest; and
d). any other order or further order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. Subsequently, on 7 October 2019, this Court, while entertaining a Suo Moto Writ Petition [Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No 2 of 2019], passed an order recording the statement of the Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the State of Maharashtra that no further trees were being felled till the next date of listing.
3. On 5 August 2022, this Court directed that all the connected writ petitions and Special Leave Petitions could be listed for final disposal. No specific interim directions were issued in view of the position of Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited [MMRCL] that no further trees had been felled since the order dated 7 October 2019 and none be cut till the next date of hearing.
4. The position in regard to the permissions which have been sought for the felling of trees in respect of the proposed depot at Aarey for Metro Line - 3 has been summarized in a plan which has been placed on the record by the Solicitor General. The position is elucidated below:
A Car Depot
(i) Permission applied on 21 July 2017;
(ii) Permission granted by the Tree Authority on 13 September 2019;
(iii) Trees permitted to be cut - 2185; and
(iv) Actual number of trees cut - 2144.
B Ramp area
(i) Permission applied on 6 September 2017;
(ii) Permission granted by the Tree Authority on 6 July 2018;
(iii) Trees permitted to be cut - 235; and
(iv) Actual number of trees cut - 212.
C Shunting area
(i) Permission applied on 11 February 2019;
(ii) Total number of trees affected - 84; and
(iii) Grant of permission awaited.
5. The IA which has been moved by MMRCL [IA No 169860 of 2022 in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No 2 of 2019] is for permission to enable it to move the Tree Authority for the felling of 84 trees required for the purpose of proceeding with the shunting segment of the Aarey car depot. For convenience of reference, the relief which has been sought in IA moved by MMRCL is extracted below:
"a) Direct/permit the Tree Authority to decide the application dated 11.02.2019 filed by MMRCL pending before it and pass final order thereof with respect to cutting of the 84 trees under The Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act 1975 located on Metro Car Shed Land at Aarey Colony admeasuring approximately 33 hectares for the Mumbai Metro Line-3 project in Mumbai and permit, MMRCL to implement such decision of the Tree Authority, as the case may be;"
6. Apart from the IA which has been moved by MMRCL, this Court is seized of the following IAs:
i. IA No 104886 of 2022 in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No 2 of 2019seeking, inter alia,that (a) the order dated 21 July 2022 issued by the Urban Development Department of the Government of Maharashtra be kept in abeyance as it permits work on the car depot at Aarey, (b) the Government of Maharashtra submit the Wildlifereport on the Aarey Car Shed plot and to grant protection to wildlife on the said plot and declare the area as a forest;
ii. IA No 178233 of 2019 in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No 2 of 2019 seeking inter alia,the issuance of directions to the Government of Maharashtra to declare Aarey as a forest and direct that no trees
The court's decision balances public interest, environmental concerns, and the progress of the Metro Line - 3 project, allowing MMRCL to pursue its application for felling permission while emphasizin....
Compliance with specific court directions and the jurisdiction of the Tree Authority in granting permission to fell trees.
The court upheld the balance between public infrastructure development and environmental protection, affirming that necessary permissions for tree transplantation were obtained under applicable laws.
The court determined that disputes regarding property rights from lease agreements are best resolved in civil courts, reaffirming that public interest considerations can justify governmental actions ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of obtaining statutory permissions and approvals, complying with the terms and conditions imposed in the statutory approvals, and....
Re-densification policy upheld with compensatory afforestation enhancing green cover, balancing development and environmental safeguards.
Re-densification policy upheld with enhanced green spaces and 10:1 tree plantation compensating park use and tree removal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.