Disposed

Rogers Francis Nunes v. the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Nov 2014WP/1903/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench disposed of a writ petition challenging the reclassification of Khar Land areas. The Court relied upon recommendations from the National Coastal Zone Management Authority and a clearanced EPA notification to direct the authorities to treat the area as CRZ-III and grant necessary permissions.

What did the court decide?

Directions to Respondents to treat Khar Land Development Scheme areas as CRZ-III and grant all necessary permissions in accordance with law.

Rogers Francis Nunes Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

907.wp.1903.13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.1903 OF 2013

¶4

Rogers Francis Nunes ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors ..Respondents

¶5

Mr. P. S Dani,Senior Advocate i/b Amol P. Mhatre,for the Petitioner. Ms. Sharmila Deshmukh,for Respondent No.3. Mr. V. B. Thadani, AGP, for Respondent-State. Ms. S. V. Bharucha, for Respondent No.6.

¶6

CORAM :- MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.

¶7

DATE :- NOVEMBER 11, 2014.

¶8

P. C.:

¶9

By an order dated 13th June, 2014 this Court had directed the Government of India-Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) to take a decision on the request of the Irrigation Department, Government of Maharashtra to declare the Khar Land Scheme as CRZ-III and for reclassification of area from CRZ-I to CRZ-III. The affidavit dated 23rd September, 2014 has been filed by the Joint

¶10

Aswale 1/3

¶11

907.wp.1903.13

¶12

Director of MOEF pointing out that on the basis of the recommendation, MCZMA, National Coastal Zone Management Authority (NCZMA) had in its meeting held on 2nd June, 2003 recommended the reclassification of the Kharland area from CRZ-I to CRZ-III, subject to certain conditions. The MOEF after examining the recommendations of above authorities and taking into consideration the information provided by the KLDC granted clearance dated 22nd August, 2003 to the Khar Land Development Scheme in the State of Maharashtra from Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 1991 stipulating certain conditions. It is specifically stated in paragraph no.6 of the affidavit that all the lands covered under the above clearance shall be considered as CRZ-III.

¶13

2 The learned counsel for the MOEF has also placed on record a copy of the communication dated 7th August, 2014 from MOEF, Irrigation Department of Government of Maharashtra State, Mumbai interalia, as under:-. The same is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification.

¶14

“ Ministry has examined the recommendation of NCZMA and decided to accept the same. An Office Memorandum on the reclassification was issued on 1^st July, 2011. According to the OM, no reclassification of CRZ areas of CZMP approved in 1996 under the CRZ Notification, 1991, except for Defence/Security matters, Court directions and error evident on record, will be considered by the Ministry. The respective SCZMAs shall consider such reclassification issues while preparing the CZMPs under the new CRZ Notification

Aswale 2/3

907.wp.1903.13

of 2011.

It is further submitted that the status of preparation of new CZMPs under CRZ Notification,2011 has been reviewed periodically and it has been noted that the draft CZMPS for Mumbai and Raigad are at a final stage. In view of the above, the Irrigation Department, Government of Maharashtra, is requested to contact the MCZMA.”

¶19

3 In view of the above communication and the affidavit filed on behalf of the MOUF, it is clear that the MOUF had decided to accept the recommendation of NCZMA and an Office Memorandum on the reclassification was issued on 1^st July, 2011. Accordingly, the Respondent Authorities shall act on the basis of the above communication dated 7^th August, 2014 and on the basis that the Khar Land Development Scheme areas are falling under CRZ-III and grant all necessary permissions in accordance with law. On that basis, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶20

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶21

(B. P. COLABAWALLA , J.)

¶22

Aswale 3/3

Rogers Francis Nunes v. the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rogers Francis Nunes v. the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Miss. Prajakta Sanjay Sawant Vs Pullela Gopichand Chief National Coach Badminton Association of India and 3 Ors.

Nainesh Suresh Dolas Vs the Controller of Rationing and Vicil Supply and Ors.

National Peroxide Ltd.and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Netra Ajit Vijayakar and Anr. Vs Shankar Gajanan Velkar

Rahul Chintamani Gajanan Velkar Vs Chintamani Gajanan Velkar

Adv. Nilesh Ojha Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.