Case Note & Summary
Two public interest litigations were filed before the Bombay High Court challenging construction and reclamation activities undertaken by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai for a cycling and jogging track project inside Powai Lake. The first PIL was filed by two PhD researchers from IIT Bombay, Omkar Mahadeo Supekar and Abhishek Ram Gopal Tripathi, while the second PIL was filed by environmental NGO Vanashakti and its director Stalin Dayanand. The petitioners alleged that Powai Lake is a notified wetland under the National Wetland Atlas 2011 and included in the National Plan for Conservation of Aquatic Ecosystems. They contended that MCGM had reclaimed the wetland and was carrying out construction activities by uprooting trees, digging ground, dumping boulders, and filling sand and crushed stones over the water body, catchment area, crocodile habitat, and ecologically sensitive wetland. Two construction sites were identified: one adjacent to the Renaissance Hotel compound wall and another known as Deer Park. The petitioners claimed that site one had been exploited since July 2021 and about 100 meters of natural water body had been constructed upon. They argued that any reclamation and construction would destroy the shoreline food web, increase siltation, cause loss of native water plants, and accelerate eutrophication and destruction of the lake. Respondent MCGM filed a reply affidavit asserting that there was a dearth of community recreation spaces in eastern suburbs and that the proposed cycle path and walkway would create a large community open space. MCGM stated that the walkway would be developed using Gabion Technology, which consists of PVC coated galvanized iron wire mesh baskets filled with stones, placed without foundation or joinery. It argued that the technology is porous, does not impede water flow, involves no dumping of debris or reclamation, and may provide refuge for aquatic life. MCGM further claimed that the pathway would substantially lie in the Natural Area beyond the lake perimeter, with only limited portions covered by water during monsoon months. The Forest Department began filing a reply affidavit but the text was truncated. The High Court allowed Interim Application No.716 of 2022 filed by Zoru Darayush Bathena and disposed of both PILs by a common judgment and order. Judgment was reserved on 25 April 2022 and pronounced on 6 May 2022.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Wetland Protection - Reclamation and Construction Inside Powai Lake Wetland - Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 - Petitioners alleged that MCGM carried out reclamation and construction activities by uprooting trees, digging ground, dumping boulders, and filling sand and stones over water body, catchment area, crocodile habitat and wetland; Respondent MCGM denied reclamation, claiming use of porous Gabion Technology involving no construction or reclamation; Held that PILs disposed of by common judgment and interim application allowed (Paras 1-8). B) Town Planning - Development Control Regulations - Compliance with DCR 2034 for Cycle Track Project - Development Control Regulation for Greater Mumbai 2034 - Petitioners contended that the cycling and jogging track project violated notified DCR; MCGM submitted that walkway follows existing motorable road alignment and substantially lies in Natural Area beyond lake perimeter with only limited portions under monsoon water; Court considered whether project required approvals and whether it constituted construction or reclamation; Held that common judgment disposes of PILs (Paras 1,6-8). C) Interim Relief - Intervention Application - Allowing Intervention - Not mentioned - Applicant sought intervention in PIL challenging Powai Lake construction; Court allowed Interim Application No.716 of 2022 and disposed of it; Held that interim application allowed (Para 2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether construction and reclamation activities for cycling and jogging track inside Powai Lake violated Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 and notified Development Control Regulation for Greater Mumbai 2034
Final Decision
Interim Application No.716 of 2022 was allowed and disposed of; both PILs were disposed of by a common judgment and order. The text provided did not include the full operative directions beyond the interim application.
Law Points
- Construction and reclamation activities inside a notified wetland must comply with Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act
- 1966 and Development Control Regulation for Greater Mumbai 2034
- use of porous Gabion Technology may not amount to reclamation or construction if no foundation or joinery is involved
- interim application for intervention allowed
- PILs disposed of by common judgment
