The court emphasized the necessity of balancing economic development with environmental protection, approving a project for cement transportation via waterways while ensuring compliance with statutory environmental conditions.

JUDGMENT :

BHARATI DANGRE, J.

1. Adani Cementation Limited, a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and a part of Adani Group, has approached this Court seeking issuance of writ of mandamus or any other writ/order or direction, directing the Respondents/Authorities to Digitally signed permit the Petitioner to carry out the work of construction of a berthing/captive jetty to facilitate transportation of cement, clinker and other raw material through waterways alongwith a conveyor corridor and an approach Road to the proposed cement grinding and fly ash/slag processing unit, a back up storage unit in Shahapur and Shahabaz in Raigad district for meeting the increasing need for cement of Mumbai Metropolitan Region.

The Petitioner has prayed for an approval from this Court in the wake of the directive issued in Judgment and Order dated 17/09/2018 in Paragraph 83 (8) in Public Interest Litigation No.87/2006, by considering the public importance of the project.

2. We have heard the learned senior counsel Mr.Vikram Nankani for the Petitioner.

In the Petition filed to the above effect the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MOEFCC) is impleaded as Respondent No.1, whereas, the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) is impleaded as Respondent No.2. The State of Maharashtra through Environment Department, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and the Chief Wildlife Warden and Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Wildlife) alongwith the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Mangrove Cell) are impleaded as Respondent Nos.2 to 6. The Maharashtra Maritime Board is Respondent No.7 to the Petition, whereas, pursuant to the amendment being allowed to be carried out by order dated 26/02/2024, the Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG) is impleaded as Respondent No.9.

We have also heard Mr.Y.R. Mishra for Respondent No.1, Ms.Jaya Bagwe for Respondent No.2-MCZMA and Ms.Neha Bhide, Government Pleader alongwith Mr.Omkar Chandurkar, the Additional Government Pleader for the State Authorities. The Maritime Board is represented by Advocate Mr.Rakesh Singh, whereas, the newly added Respondent No.9/BEAG is represented by Mr.Aditya Mehta.

3. By consensus between the parties, we have taken up the Petition for final hearing at the stage of admission. ‘Rule’. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

4. Considering the increasing demand for cement, an essential ingredient for modern construction and infrastructural development and in particular its demand in Mumbai Metropolitan Region, in view of the infrastructure projects such as Mumbai Metro, Navi Mumbai International Airport, Coastal Road Project and other development works, the Petition proceeds to state that around 75% of the current demand of cement is being met through production units in Kalburgi District in Karnataka and Vidarbha District in Maharashtra. However, the production units being situated at a distance of around 500 and 900 kilometers from Mumbai and the cement being required to be transported through roadways and railways, it is the case of the Petitioner that it not only leads to heavy congestion of roads, but leaves a big carbon footprint behind.

Reliance is placed upon the RITES Report on Integrated National Waterways Transportation Grid, 1 liter of fuel moves 24 tonnes per kilometer via road, 95 tonnes per kilometer via railways and 215 tonnes per kilometer via waterways. Highlighting that the transport sector accounts for 13.5% of the carbon dioxide emissions in India according to a 2020 study conducted by Climate Action Tracker, an independent climate-change policies tracker, it is estimated that it is