Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep Marne of the Bombay High Court last week prevented the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (MMRCL) from cutting down 177 trees in Aarey, Mumbai for the metro rail project until it seeks clarification from the Supreme Court.

The MMRCL has been, however, granted permission to approach local authorities for the felling of the trees, but the court has directed the MMRCL to wait until the Supreme Court clarifies its orders.

The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by one Zoru Bhathena, who has challenged the order of the tree authority of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) permitting the felling of the trees at Aarey. The MMRCL's submission was that the Supreme Court had allowed the felling of trees for clearing land for the shunting area.

The high court noted that the case before the Supreme Court is pending and scheduled to be heard on April 11. The court directed the MMRCL to approach the Supreme Court and seek clarification on the tree authority's order. Until then, the MMRCL has been directed to suspend the cutting down of trees.

“The apex court is already seized of the matter. In light of the above, propriety would require that MMRCL shall not fell the trees in furtherance of tree authorities order until it seeks clarification/order from the Hon’ble Apex Court” the court noted.

Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond, who was representing the petitioner, submitted that the Supreme Court only allowed parties to approach authorities for the felling of 84 trees but it did not grant any permission for the felling of 177 trees.

Senior Advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, representing the MMRCL, and Senior Advocate Milind Sathe, representing the BMC, on the other hand, justified the order of the tree authority and stated that it was in line with the Supreme Court's order. They also argued that Supreme Court's order needed no interpretation and was crystal clear.

The high court expressed its concern about interpreting an order of the Supreme Court, especially since the matter was still pending before the Supreme Court. The court recognized the importance of the project while also acknowledging the need to maintain ecological balance.

“There is no doubt that the metro project involves public interest and public purpose. There cannot be any debate in the proposition that the balance has to be struck between sustainable development and ecology” the order of the high court stated.

Case Title: Zoru Darayus Bathena vs Tree Authority, MCGM, Mumbai