Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Adani Cementation Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 and part of the Adani Group, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to permit construction of a berthing jetty, conveyor corridor, and approach road for a cement grinding and fly ash/slag processing unit on the Amba River in Shahapur and Shahabaz, Raigad district. The project aimed to meet the cement demand of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region through waterways, reducing road congestion and carbon emissions. The petitioner claimed that the project would use waste materials like slag and fly ash, and help reduce crop residue burning. The project involved 6000 hectares of land, including 2.2 hectares of waterfront (CRZ-IVB), 0.6497 hectares of mangrove forest (CRZ-IA), 0.5503 hectares of intertidal area (CRZ-IB), and 2.6 hectares of agricultural land (CRZ-III). It would affect 158 mangrove trees and shrubs. The petitioner had obtained a Letter of Intent from the Maharashtra Maritime Board in 2018, but the project required CRZ clearance, environmental clearance, and other statutory permissions. The petitioner approached the court seeking relaxation of the directions in PIL No.87/2006 (paragraph 83(8)) which prohibited construction in mangrove areas. The court heard the petitioner, the Union of India, MCZMA, state authorities, the Maharashtra Maritime Board, and the Bombay Environmental Action Group. The court held that the petitioner cannot bypass the statutory process of obtaining CRZ and environmental clearances, and a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to permit an activity that violates environmental laws. The petition was dismissed, and the rule was discharged.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Coastal Regulation Zone - CRZ Clearance - CRZ Notification, 2019 - The project involving construction of a berthing jetty, conveyor corridor, and cement plant on Amba River falls within CRZ areas, including CRZ-IA (mangrove forest) and CRZ-IVB (waterfront). The court held that prior CRZ clearance from the concerned authority is mandatory, and the petitioner cannot bypass the statutory process by seeking a mandamus. (Paras 1-7, 10-15) B) Environmental Law - Mangrove Protection - Destruction of Mangroves - Forest Conservation Act, 1980 - The project involves removal of 158 mangrove trees and shrubs. The court held that any diversion of mangrove forest land requires prior approval under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and the petitioner must obtain such clearance. (Paras 7, 10-15) C) Environmental Law - Public Interest Litigation - Compliance with PIL Directions - The petitioner sought relaxation of the directions in PIL No.87/2006 (paragraph 83(8)) which prohibited construction in mangrove areas. The court held that the PIL directions are binding and cannot be circumvented without proper environmental impact assessment and clearance. (Paras 1, 10-15) D) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Mandamus - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The court held that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to compel authorities to permit an activity that is illegal or in violation of environmental laws. The petitioner must first obtain all statutory clearances. (Paras 10-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to permit construction of a captive jetty and cement plant involving mangrove destruction and CRZ violations, in light of the directions in PIL No.87/2006 and the requirement of prior environmental clearances.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Environmental Law
- Coastal Regulation Zone
- Mangrove Protection
- Public Interest Litigation
- Mandamus
- CRZ Clearance
- Environmental Clearance
- Sustainable Development
- Precautionary Principle
