Thane Municipal Corporation, Thane v. Union of India, Through Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, New Delhi & Ors.

judgment of this Court in “Bombay Environmental Action Group & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”1.

2. Mr. Apte, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that Ghodbunder Road in Thane presently is one of the arterial corridors within the Mumbai Metropolitan Region, but its heavy traffic results in persistent congestion, prolonged travel time and substantial inconvenience to commuters in Thane city. It is stated that the proposed road is designed to comprise a combination of elevated viaducts and at-grade carriageways, together with the construction of a creek bridge across Thane Creek. The proposed road will function as a vital connector between National Highway no.3, Old Agra Road, State Highway no.4, and the Virar–Alibaug Multimodal Corridor. The proposed road would facilitate diversion of heavy vehicular traffic, particularly goods carriers originating from Gujarat and North India, towards the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) area, thereby significantly reducing the traffic congestion caused by heavy vehicles in and around Thane City.

3. Placing reliance on the documents annexed to the petition, Mr. Apte submits that the petitioner has followed the due process and obtained necessary permissions including under the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification. The respondent no.1 has accepted the recommendation of the Expert Appraisal Committee (in short, “EAC”) and accorded CRZ clearance to the project vide letter dated 5th March 2025, subject to compliance with the terms and conditions stipulated therein. As the alignment of the proposed project passes through areas notified as mangrove (forest) land 1 (Public Interest Litigation No. 87 of 2006), decided on 17th September 2018. 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit and involves cutting of 1,546 mangroves, the petitioner has obtained forest diversion permission in accordance with the provisions of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980. The Regional Empowered Committee of the respondent no.1 has recommended grant of clearance for the proposal and on 24th November 2023, the respondent no.1 has accorded “In-Principle” approval under section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for a diversion of 12.2607 hectares of forest land in favour of the petitioner for the proposed construction (Stage-I Clearance). On 13th May 2024, the Indian Navy granted a revised NOC which permits the road to be built beyond 100 meters from the boundary of HQ 31 WEU and requires the road to be constructed on stilts made of reinforced concrete structure up to 13 meters with view-cutters made of plastic /rubberized/fiber material. The Stage-I compliance report was forwarded to the relevant authorities and as the affected area was reduced from 12.2607 to 9.90 hectares, the Regional Expert Committee reconsidered the proposal and after deliberation, approved it for issuance of final approval for the reduced forest area. On 29th August 2025, the final approval under section 2 of the Van (Sanraksha Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980 for diversion of 9.90 hectares of forest land was granted to the petitioner (Stage-II Approval).

4. Mr. Apte submits that a comprehensive environmental management plan for Rs.60.69 crores has been prepared covering the cost of Net Present Value for mangrove land, expenses towards reinstatement of mangroves/forest land post construction, bird nesting support measures, fencing for compensatory afforestation land, avifauna habitat, conservation and environmental 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit monitoring. On 17th January 2025, the petitioner has deposited Rs.6,78,00,053/- with the Divisional Forest Officer, Mangroves Division towards compliance under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 (CAMPA). On 31st July 2025, MMRDA which is the executing agency for the project has deposited Rs.39.50 crores with the respondent no.4. In the undated affidavit of November 2025, the petitioner has stated as follows:- “15. In order to balance the micro-ecology and to provide additional Tree-for-Tree compensation and further to comply with Respondent No.2’s specific condition requiring compensatory mangrove plantation at three times the number of mangroves affected, the petitioner, in consultation with the Mangrove Cell, has identified suitable land at Survey no.70, Village Sandor, Taluka Vasai, District Palghar, admeasuring 1.5 hectares, for undertaking compensatory mangrove afforestation. Against 1,546 mangroves proposed to be cut, a total of 4,500 mangrove saplings shall be planted on the said land. The requisite amount for this purpose has already been deposited by the petitioner with respondent no.4, who shall carry out the mangrove plantation as well as the subsequent operation and maintenance for a period of 10 years.”

5. It is in this background that the petitioner has approached this Court for prior permission to undertake construction of the proposed road. The leave of this Hon’ble Court is sought in accordance with the: A. Judgment and Order dated 17th September 2018 passed by this Court in PIL No.87 of 2006 read with the order dated 2nd November 2018 in Notice of Motion No.278 of 2018 in PIL No.87 of 2006; B. Condition no. xiii imposed by the Central Government while granting “In-Principle” Approval dated 24th November 2024 under section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act (Stage-I Clearance); 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit C. Condition no.7 and Condition no.23 imposed by the respondent no.1 while granting the CRZ clearance dated 5th March 2025; D. Condition no. xi imposed by the respondent no.1 through its Forest Officer while granting final approval under section section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act (Stage-II Clearance).

6. The respondent no.1 has filed an affidavit dated 28th November 2025 in support of the project. The respondent no.4 has also filed an affidavit dated 27th January 2026 supporting the project. The respondent no.4 has confirmed the compensatory afforestation and proposed that 1,39,986 mangrove plants shall be planted on 31.5 hectares. It is stated on affidavit that it has completed plantation of 6,666 mangrove saplings in Palghar District and the remaining saplings will also be planted in close proximity of the project area. It is further stated that compensatory afforestation is proposed over 15 hectares of de- graded forest land situated at village Mendhebodi, district Gadchiroli. An attempt is being made to carry out the aforesaid compensatory afforestation in close proximity of the project area and for this purpose, the respondent no.4. is seeking appropriate approval from the respondent no.1. The relevant portions of the affidavit dated 27th January 2026 read as under:- “2. The present affidavit is being filed to bring on record certain additional information on record. It is humbly submitted that the project proposed by the Thane Municipal Corporation is for construction and development of a road which is a Development Plan road having length of 13,447 km and breadth of 40-45 m from place Balkum to Gaimukh in Thane District. This project is of public importance and the same involves cutting of 1,534 mangrove trees along the alignment of the proposed road. As per the legal provisions and the directions/conditions set forth 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit

5. by the Hon'ble Courts, the project proponent and the Mangrove Cell has to undertake and implement afforestation of these mangroves to the tune of minimum three times the Mangrove area which is affected (in the present matter the area affected is 9,9796 hectare, therefore the afforestation should be on 30 hectares minimum). For the present project, 1,39,986 Mangrove Plants are proposed to be planted on 31.5 Hectares. As on date, the Mangrove Cell has completed plantation of 6,666 mangrove saplings on Survey No.358, admeasuring 1.5 hectares, at Village Umroli, Taluka Palghar, District Palghar. That the plantation of additional 1,33,320 mangrove saplings (approx.) over an area of 15 hectares at Survey No.166/1, Village Lonipada and 15 hectares at Survey No.234/1, Village Vadkun, both situated in Palghar District, is proposed and the plantation on these locations is being undertaken and the same shall be completed during the current plantation season i.e.. by July 2026. These locations of plantations are in close proximity to the project affected area. As regards the provisions of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023 is concerned, the component of additional compensatory afforestation which was proposed over 15 hectares of degraded forest land situated at Village Mendhebodi, Compartment No.45. Range: Armori. Wadsa Forest Division, District Gadchiroli. This location was finalized and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Union of India has also granted their approval/clearance for the same. Post the said approval/sanction, the project proponent has also deposited the requisite levies and compensatory afforestation charges with Maharashtra CAMPA. It is humbly submitted that taking into consideration the concern of the Hon'ble High Court as regards taking up of this Additional Compensatory Afforestation in District-Gadchiroli instead of the same being done in close proximity of the project affected area is concerned, the Mangrove Cell will seek appropriate approval from the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Union of India (Respondent No.1) for undertaking this compensatory mangrove plantation in an area in close proximity. This approval/clearance will be sought for from the available land banks which are carved out for such purposes. Post receiving the said approval about the change in location, the exercise of plantation will be undertaken. It is humbly submitted that the Mangrove Cell is duty bound to carryout out the plantation as per the directions of the Hon'ble Court.”

7. From the perusal of the aforesaid record, we find that all the statutory authorities have approved the proposed project. The petitioner and its agencies who will execute the project have 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit agreed to comply with all the conditions in the said approvals. It is not in dispute that the project in question is of great public utility and the object is to facilitate smooth travel through the proposed road as stated above. There is no objection to the project by the respondent no.5 or by any other party. Thus, in our view, the petitioner is entitled to leave as sought for in paragraph no.83(viii) of the judgment in Bombay Environmental Action Group. We may note that this Court has recently considered a similar matter (Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority V/s Union of India)2 where permission was sought for the cutting of mangroves for the proposed construction of the Kasheli Depot, including transmission towers/lines for power supply at Kasheli and Dive– Anjur villages for the Mumbai Metro Line–5 in Thane district. While granting such permission, this Court recorded its serious concern regarding the apathy displayed and the unsatisfactory state of mangrove re-plantation and compensatory afforestation. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted: “22. During the hearing of this petition, we observed a glaring lack of coordination between the grant of permission and the actual execution of afforestation activities and also gross delay in plantations. Despite deposits being made as directed by the authorities, no serious efforts were undertaken to carry out afforestation or to plant mangroves in place of the cut mangroves/trees. We further found that the monies deposited for afforestation were not being utilized for the intended purpose, and that several other significant lacunae existed in the process.

29. We had also directed the learned Addl. G.P to provide details of projects undertaken over the past three years, i.e. the extent of mangrove destruction involved therein, and the corresponding afforestation measures undertaken/ mangroves plantation done. However, despite the said directions, no such information was made available to this Court or was forthcoming.

30. In light of the above, we considered it appropriate to issue effective directions, since the issue in question has a direct bearing on the environment. The concept of ‘sustainable development’ has been a matter of great concern for all, whether environmentalists or the 2 WP No.3727 of 2025, Order dated 9th September 2025 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit Courts. The Apex Court has consistently observed that development and environment must go hand in hand. In other words, there should not be development at the cost of environment and vice versa and that development can take place only after ensuring that as far as possible, environment is safeguarded. It is also observed by Courts that destruction of mangroves violates the fundamental rights of citizens under Article 21 of the Constitution, and that the State, its agencies, and instrumentalities are under a mandatory duty to protect and preserve mangroves under Articles 21, 47, 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution. It is thus imperative that in every project where permission is granted resulting in cutting of mangroves or compensatory afforestation must be carried out trees, simultaneously, or even prior to such destruction. Furthermore, all related information must be published on the website to ensure transparency and public awareness. Only through such measures can the true spirit and objective of the decision in Public Interest Litigation No. 87/2006, be achieved.

31. We are of the considered view that where any development project involves the felling of mangroves or diversion of ecologically sensitive land, compensatory afforestation must not remain a formality or a mere post-facto measure. Instead, it must be enforced in a transparent manner, with a parallel condition for project execution. In fact, requisite permissions must be obtained well in advance of the commencement of the project, since the proposed project route i.e. start to end, is already within the knowledge of the authorities, and should not be sought belatedly at the last moment, as is presently being done.

33. The importance of mangroves can hardly be overstated. Not only do mangroves help in mitigating the progression of climate change, but they also play a critical role in limiting its impact. As global temperatures rise, extreme weather events such as storms and tidal surges are becoming more frequent and severe. The trunks and root systems of mangroves absorb the force of waves, serving as a natural frontline defence that shields inland areas and higher ground. Indeed, mangroves are rightly regarded as “climate heroes,” since they sequester up to five times more carbon than terrestrial forests, incorporating it into their leaves, branches, roots, and the sediments beneath. Under suitable environmental conditions, mangroves can retain and store this carbon for decades, if not centuries. Mangroves which are planted as small saplings take 15- 20 years to grow into trees. Trees which are felled also take years to grow. Thus, it is important to place the route well in advance, so that destruction/felling of mangroves/trees can be minimized. 35 . This delay cannot be countenanced, as this undermines not only the purpose of afforestation but also the trust reposed by this Court through its judgment in PIL No. 87/2006, which is founded on the public trust doctrine.

39. This observation underscores the necessity of ensuring that afforestation is not only undertaken but is done in a manner that 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit meaningfully restores ecological balance in the very regions that suffer degradation, rather than in distant areas where the environmental impact is negligible. We also are of the opinion that it is imperative to create land banks i.e. areas readily available where afforestation can undertaken in future. Further, the progress of afforestation must be closely monitored, including the mortality rate of planted saplings. Where trees or mangroves are translocated, their survival and growth shall also be systematically monitored and reported, so that the compensatory measures are not illusory but effective in practice.”

8. In the present case, although the petitioner has paid part of the requisite charges and has undertaken to comply with the statutory permissions, we expect that a similar situation will not recur. We clarify that all the conditions set out in paragraph 40(IV) in order dated 9th September 2025 passed by this Court in “Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority v. Union of India & Ors”3 shall also apply, to the extent relevant, to the present project. It is only on the basis of the express environmental commitments and the assurances furnished by the petitioner and the respondent no.4 in this petition, that both in situ mangrove plantation and the compensatory afforestation shall be carried out, protected and duly maintained, that we are inclined to grant the reliefs sought in this petition. We may also note that in another matter pertaining to the construction of the proposed coastal road from Versova to Bhayandar in Writ Petition No.3790 of 20254, this Court has imposed conditions to ensure in situ re-plantation of mangroves and compensatory afforestation is carried out, protected and duly maintained. Similarly in this matter, what is necessary is that in situ re-plantation of mangroves and compensatory afforestation either at Gadchiroli or preferably in close proximity to the project is effectively 3 4 (Writ Petiton No.3727 of 2025) Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation v. Union of India & Ors. - Order dated 12 th December 2025. 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit implemented, maintained and protected. We therefore direct the petitioner to file an interim application on an yearly basis, with comprehensive status/audit reports containing all the necessary particulars along with an affidavit signed by the Municipal Commissioner of the petitioner as well as by the respondent no.4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent nos.1 to 4 have agreed to comply with any additional conditions that this Court may suggest/impose at any stage of the project. Such interim application shall be filed every year for the next ten years on or before 12th January and shall be automatically listed on the third Friday of January for the purposes of compliance and review. Failure to file such reports or interim application shall be treated as contempt of this Court. Subject to the outcome of the applications, this Court may impose such further directions as required.

9. In view of the above, Writ Petition No.14525 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which read as under: “(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 madamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thereby directing the Respondent Authorities to permit the Petitioner to execute the project of construction of Balkum to Gaimukh Road Right of Way (RoW) varying from 40 to 45 Meter wide with 13447 Meters Length, in view of the public importance of the project and finding of this Hon’ble Court recorded at paragraph 83(viii) of the Judgment and Order dated 17th September 2018 passed by this hon’ble Court in PIL No.87 of 2006.”

10. Liberty to apply. [ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ] SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT ABHAY DIXIT 901- WP-14525-2025.doc Dixit