ORDER

Original Application No.23/2024(WZ)

1. We are passing this order in continuation to the earlier orders dated 29.01.2024, 05.03.2024, 21.03.2024, 26.04.2024 and 22.05.2024.

2. In compliance with our previous order dated 22.05.2024, from the side of respondent No.1- Maharashtra State Biodiversity Board, reply affidavit dated 03.06.2024 has been filed, wherein it is clarified that the answering respondent does not have any role in construction and developmental activities on Survey Number in question, as the same falls under the jurisdiction of Dy. Conservator of Forests, Pune/respondent No.2.

3. In compliance with our previous order dated 22.05.2024, an additional affidavit dated 15.07.2024 on behalf of respondent No.1-PCCF in Original Application No.64/2024(WZ) and on behalf of respondent Nos.2, 4, 6 & 7 in Original Application No.23/2024(WZ) has been filed, wherein it is submitted that in response to the query made by this Tribunal vide order dated 22.05.2024 in para no.7, it is clarified that it is wrongly stated due to a clerical error as ‘Removing Gliricidia and Tall Plantations’ rather it should be ‘Removing Gliricidia and planting tall plantations’. It is further clarified that the answering respondents intend to remove only Gliricidia and to plant tall plants of local species. They have removed Gliricidia and have already planted tall plants of local species, as per their Work Plan at serial No.1 at page no.52. The work, which has already been completed, has shown in the Work Plan at Serial Nos.1, 11, 13, 18 & 19 at page no.152, which pertain to 1). Removing Gliricidia and planting tall plantations; 11) Water Supply (water tank with water supply from tanker); 13). Pathway; 18) Water Storage tank; and 19)

Pipeline along-with bore-well.

4. It is further submitted in this affidavit by the above-mentioned respondents that the remaining work, which are mentioned at page nos.152 & 153, are not going to be undertaken. During argument, it is made clear by the learned counsel for answering respondent that the water tank is being set up with a view to sprinkling water upon the new plantation done by them. Pathway is being set up for the person to reach water to the sampling and water to the tank and pipeline along-with bore-

well is being set up for the purpose of irrigating these plants and for no other purpose.

5. With regard to the work to be done, it is mentioned at page nos.152 & 153 of the paper book, which pertain to a Recreational park and a children park respectively, which are not going to be set up.

6. Against this affidavit, rejoinder affidavit dated 15.07.2024 has been filed from the side of applicants, stating therein that the work of removal of the Gliricidia is done by the respondents based on the draft working plan, which is not as per law. The additional affidavit of above-mentioned respondents is silent on the aspect of public access while dealing with Pathway. The construction of water storage tank will lead to breeding of mosquitoes, which creates health problems for the local residents. Pipeline along-with bore-well will diminish ground water reserves, which are significant for the local residents.

7. It is further submitted in this rejoinder affidavit by the applicants that the original 4-acre woodlot with 25-year-old adult, carbon absorbing trees that needed no human care and hosted a thriving bio-diversity of flora and fauna, has now been replaced with saplings, that will need to be cared for, protected, watered and nurtured till they are safely matured. Therefore, Respondents have created an uncertain dependency in place of a guaranteed asset.

8. It is further submitted in this rejoinder affidavit by the applicants that the saplings would need lot more water as compared to fully grown trees. The public access for recreation and for the construction of an eco- tourism park were the two primary reasons for the evident public discontent, because of which the present Original Application is filed.

9. It is furthe