Bombay High Court
Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust vs Union Of India Thr. Ministry Of ... on 14 January, 2021
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni
Digitally
signed by
Prashant
Prashant V. Rane
V. Rane Date:
2021.01.19
13:12:19
19-wpst 424-21.doc
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.424 OF 2021
Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust ..Petitioner
versus
1. Union of India
2. Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management
Authority
3. State of Maharashtra
4. Chief Conservator of Forest (Mangrove Cell)
5. Additional Principal Chief
Conservator of Forests ..Respondents
.....
Mr.Saket Mone with Mr.Subit Chakrabarti, Mr.Vishesh Kalra and
Mr.Abhishek Salian, Mr.Shantam Mandhayan i/b. Vidhii Partners, for
the Petitioners.
Smt.R.A.Salunkhe, AGP for the State
Mr.D.P.Singh with Mr.Tanay Mandot, for Respondent no.1.
Mr.Jaya Bagwe i/b. Sharmila Deshmukh, for Respondent no.2-MCZMA.
.....
CORAM :- DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ &
G. S. KULKARNI, J.
DATE :- JANUARY 14, 2021.
PC :
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By
consent of the parties, heard finally.
2. The petitioner is the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (for short
'JNPT') which intends to carry out the work of the project being
proposed boat landing jetty at Nhava, and seawalls of Gharapuri and
Prashant Rane 1/5
19-wpst 424-21.doc
Panje Villages, in accordance with the permissions granted to it. Such
work is stated to be of public utility, sustainable development and is in
consonance with Corporate Environment responsibility of the petitioner
aimed at benefiting the citizens and not premised on private or
commercial gain.
3. The JNPT accordingly, obtained No Objection of
Grampanchayats of Gharapuri, Panje and Nhava and moved an
application under Form-I to respondent no.2-Maharashtra Coastal Zone
Management Authority (for short 'MCZMA') seeking its approval as the
proposed work fell under the Coastal Zone Regulations. The MCZMA in
its 145th meeting held on 7 July 2020 considered the JNPT's proposal
and recommended the same from the CRZ point of view to the State
Environment Impact Assessment Authority (for short 'SEIAA'), subject to
compliance of certain conditions. One of the conditions being of a prior
permission of this Court to be obtained for the reason of the project
being within 50 meters of the mangroves buffer zone. On 28 December
2020 the SEIAA has granted CRZ clearance for the said project.
4. The JNPT has contended that the JNPT shall abide by all
conditions as may be imposed in the approvals that may be granted by
the different authorities before commencing the work. It is the case of
the JNPT that the proposed work does not require cutting of
mangroves, however, as the works fall under buffer zone of mangroves,
permissions were required to be obtained from the MCZMA and the
other authorities. To support this contention JNPT has annexed copies
of the site inspection reports dated 7 January 202 ad 6 March 2020 at
'Exhibit F' and "Exhibit G" respectively to the petition.
Prashant Rane 2/5
19-wpst 424-21.doc
5. At page 20 ground (G) of the petition, the JNPT has stated
that the said project is permissible under the provisions of CRZ
Notification dated 6 January 2011 as also held by the expert statutory
bodies namely the MCZMA-respondent no.2 and the SEIAA-respondent
no.3. JNPT has obtained all necessary clearances and permissions in
accordance with law for the said project and the only impediment in
executing the project is the condition imposed by the clearances to
obtain leave of this Court in terms of the orders passed by this Court in
the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Public Interest
Litigation no.87 of 2006 "The Bombay Environmental Action Group
(BEAG) & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra", dated 17 September 2018
("the BEAG's case").
6. Mr.Mone, learned Advocate for the petitioner has taken us
through the averments as made in the petition and the documents as
placed on record. Mr.Mone has also drawn our attention to the order
dated 17 September 2018 in BEAG's case wherein although orders are
issued prohibiting cutting of mangroves, however a window has been
kept open for removal of mangroves, as per directions contained in
paragraph 83 (viii) of the judgment, if the Court finds it necessary for
public good or in public interest. In any event the mangroves are not
being removed for the project in question in the present case.
7. On the above conspectus, the JNPT has prayed for the
following substantive relief:-
"(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of
Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or
direction in the nature of mandamus under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, thereby directing the
Prashant Rane 3/5
19-wpst 424-21.doc
Respondent Authorities to permit the Petitioner to
execute the proposed boat landing jetty at Nhava, and
Seawalls at Gharapuri and Panje Villages, in view o
the public importance of the project, by granting leave
as contemplated in paragraph 83(viii) of the
Judgment and Order dated 17th September 2018 in
PIL No.87 of 2006;
8. Ms.Salunkhe, learned AGP would submit that the State
Government would not dispute what is contended by the JNPT. She
would, however, submit that the JNPT should abide by all the terms and
conditions which would be imposed by the authorities in undertaking
the project.
9. Mr.Mone for the JNPT in responding to Ms.Salunkhe's
submission, makes a statement that the JNPT would strictly adhere to
all the conditions as imposed by different authorities which would grant
approval to the project.
10. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having
perused the record, it is quite clear to us that per se there is no
destruction of the mangroves by the JNPT in implementation of the
project work. The mangroves however situated in the vicinity of 50
meters of the proposed work to be undertaken, the JNPT has
approached this Court praying for the above relief. Also the MCZMA has
found it appropriate that the JNPT approaches this Court and seeks
permission considering the orders passed by this Court in BEAG's case.
11. It is also not in dispute that the work in question is a public
work necessary for the operations of the JNPT which is one of the
Prashant Rane 4/5
19-wpst 424-21.doc
important container ports in the country. The project in question is also
one of the public importance being installation of boat landing jetty as
described in the petition. The JNPT with the technical expertise
available at its disposal has planned the project which is being
implemented. We are sure that in undertaking such project the JNPT
would take utmost care of the environment and would take all
precautions in not damaging mangroves and keep the ecological
balance on other environmental aspects.
12. In the above circumstances, we are inclined to permit the
JNPT to undertake this project as per the permissions/approvals it may
obtain for this project from the concerned statutory authorities. We
accordingly allow the petition, in terms of the following order:-
ORDER
I. We accordingly allow the petition in terms of prayer clause
(a) (supra).
II. The JNPT shall undertake the work in question in
compliance of all the terms and conditions which may be imposed by
the MCZMA and SEIAA and/or any other appropriate authority as
required by law.
III. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.
(G. S. KULKARNI, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
Prashant Rane 5/5
