Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(BOM) 24873
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.9368 OF 2021
National Highways Authority of India
(Ministry of Road and Transport & Highways)
GM(T) & Project Director, PIU-Thane
MTNL Building, Opp. to Babubhai Petrol Pump, Near Castle Mill Circle, LBS Road,
Thane (West) 400601
… Petitioner
vs.
1 The State of Maharashtra through the Office at Govt. Pleader, High Court, Bombay
2 The Union of India
Through the Advocate for Union of India, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai
3 Bombay Environmental Action Group
41 Rajghir Chambers, Saheed Bhagat Singh Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400001, Opposite Old Custom House
4 Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority
Environment Department, 2nd Floor, Room No.217, Annexe Building, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
… Respondents
Mr. Anil Singh, Additional Solicitor General of India a/w Mr. Pralhad Paranjape, Mr. S. D. Shetty, Mr. Rakesh Singh, Ms. Heena Shaikh i/b. M. V. Kini & Co. for Petitioner.
Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Rui Rodrigues for Respondent No.2 – Union of India.
Mr. Rohan Kelkar a/w Ms. Sheetal Shah i/b. M/s. Mehta Girdharlal for Respondent No.3.
Ms. Jaya Bagwe for Respondent No.4 (MCZMA).
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ. & SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED : 02 FEBRUARY, 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Anil Singh, Pralhad Paranjape, S. D. Shetty, Rakesh Singh, Heena Shaikh, M. V. Kini & Co.
For the Respondents: M.M. Pabale, Rui Rodrigues, Rohan Kelkar, Sheetal Shah, Jaya Bagwe
The development of public infrastructure in eco-sensitive zones is permissible under specific provisions, provided strict adherence to sustainable development principles is maintained.
Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Coastal Regulation Zone Notification dated 6th January 2011 - Development of Vadodara Mumbai Expressway involving felling of mangrove trees - Petitioner sought leave from the court as project affects mangrove trees within CRZ-IA area, and requisite permissions obtained from authorities - Court held that development activities are permissible under specific provisions of CRZ Notification, emphasizing the balance between environmental protection and sustainable development - Permissions to fell 350 mangrove trees and divert a small area granted. (Paras 25, 16, 17, 18)
(B) Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) - Provisions for construction activities - Court examined the restrictive nature of CRZ provisions and recognized exceptional allowances for public interest projects - Affirmed that eco-sensitive areas do not uniformly prohibit development where essential public infrastructure is concerned. (Paras 26-29)
JUDGMENT ( Per SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage.
2. Petitioner - National Highways Authority of India has filed this Petition seeking leave of this Court to execute the project of development of Vadodara Mumbai Expressway (Phase-II Main Alignment) from Km 26+320 to km 104+700 (km 390.864 of NH-8) of Main Expressway (Length 78.118 km). Leave is sought as some portion of the project comes within Coastal Regulation Zone - IA area. The project would affect 2686 number of mangrove trees within proposed Right of Way, out of which 1,001 mangrove trees are located within the construction zone, which are required to be felled. Leave is sought in view of directions of this Court in paragraph 85 of the judgment and order dated 17th September 2018 passed by this Court in Public Interest Litigation No.87 of 2006 in Bombay Environmental Action Group and Another Versus State of Maharashtra and others.
3. Petitioner - National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) is constituted under Section 3 of The National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988 and has been entrusted with the development, maintenance and management of National Highways and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Government of India has entrusted to Petitioner the project of development of Vadodara Mumbai Expressway, which is a part of Delhi-Mumbai expressway corridor. Petition concerns Phase-II Main Alignment from Km 26+320 to km 104+700 (km 390.864 of NH-8) of Main Expressway (Length 78.118 km) (for short, “the project”). The project of Vadodara Mumbai Expressway is part of the National Highways Development Project (“NHDP”) Phase-VI. It is averred by Petitioner that the present traffic on NH-48 (old NH-8) is about 94,322 PCUs (2020) and projected traffic is 1,41,533 PCUs in 2030 which would exceed the capacity of present 6 lane highway. Since, widening of NH-48(old N-8) is not feasible, the Government of India has decided to construct Greenfield Vadodara Mumbai Expressway.
4. The proposed expressway crosses Vaitarana River with Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) categories CRZ I, II, III and IV. The Village wise breakup of CRZ Categories as stated in the Petition is as under;
| Village | CRZ IA (Mangrove) | CRZ IA (Mangrove Buffer) | CRZ IB | CRZ II | CRZ III | CRZ IVA | CRZ IVB |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doliv | 1,551.90 | - | 16,126.50 | 11,661.90 | - | - | 15,469.00 |
| Wadhiv / Vaithi Village | 10,322.60 | 9,635.60 | 5,743.90 | - | 806.80 | - | 21,735.40 |
| Navghar Village | 14,014.80 | 6,297.30 | 8,710.40 | - | 6,548.60 | - | 7,547.10 |
| Penand Village | 1,589.50 | 5,410.90 | 7,237.04 | - | 40,029.20 | - | 8,505.20 |
| Sonave Village | 4,455.90 | 5,407.20 | 13,247.40 | - | 58,492.40 | - | 8,085.60 |
| Sakhare Village | - | - | 1,195.10 | - | 6,764.30 | - | 1,469.10 |
| Khamboli Village | - | - | 3,372.50 | - | 12,213.94 | - | 10,397.60 |
| Dahisar Village | 32.10 | - | 7,947.80 | - | 3,491.80 | - | 6,292.90 |
| Total (in Sq. m.) | 31,966.80 | 26751.00 | 63,580.64 | 11,661.90 | 128,347.04 | - | 79,501.9 |
| Total (in ha) | 3.20 | 2.68 | 6.36 | 1.17 | 12.83 | 0.00 | 7.95 |
Grand Total = 341809.3 Sq. m / 34.2 Ha
5. Petitioner approached the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (“MCZMA”) with a proposal for seeking its approval for environmental clearance. MCZMA in its 144th meeting held on 11th June 2020 deliberated the proposal of Petitioner and decided to recommend the same to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEFCC”) subject to conditions specified therein. MCZMA accordingly conveyed its recommendations to the Director (IA-III), Coastal Zone Regulation, MoEFCC, vide its letter dated 3rd September 2020. This is how the project has received clearance from MCZMA.
6. Petitioner simultaneously approached MoEFCC seeking environmental clearance. After considering recommendations of the Expert Appraisal Committee (“EAC”) for infrastructure, CRZ and other miscellaneous projects, MoEFCC decided to grant environmental and CRZ clearance for the project subject to various conditions stated therein.
7. As
