Disposed

New Link Road Residents Forum v. Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia and 15 Ors.

Bombay HC14 Jan 2020PIL/90/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of PIL No. 90 of 2010 after reviewing an affidavit confirming the cessation of salt manufacturing on mangrove land as an undertaking to the court, thereby resolving the litigation's specific objectives.

What did the court decide?

The PIL was disposed of without further orders as the specific remedy of stopping salt manufacturing was ensured.

New Link Road Residents Forum Vs Krishnadevi… — Environment and Pollution | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

919-PIL.90.2010.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 90 OF 2010

¶4

New Link Road Residents Forum } Petitioner versus Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia } and Ors. } Respondents

¶5

M/s.Abdi, Wagh and Co. for the petitioner-absent.

¶6

Mr.Rajiv Narula with Mr.Advait Raorane i/b. M/s.Jhangiani, Narula and Associates for respondent nos. 1 to 9.

¶7

Mr.G.W.Mattos-AGP for State.

¶8

Mr.Advait M. Sethna for Union of India.

¶9

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & R. I. CHAGLA, JJ.

¶10

DATED :- JANUARY 14, 2020

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

In terms of our earlier orders and directions, now affidavits have been filed.

¶13

The Constituted Attorney of respondent nos.1 to 9 has filed

¶14

an affidavit affirmed on 8^th January, 2020, in which, in para 2, the following statements are made:-

¶15

“2 I say that the Respondent No. 1 to 9 have filed a Suit being Suit No.1119 of 2011 in this Hon’ble Court challenging the Notification dated 18^th February, 2009 issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division in pursuance to the Order dated 12^th December, 1996 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition No.202 of 1995 and in pursuance to the Order dated 6^th December, 2005 passed by the Hon’ble Court in Writ

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

J.V.SALUNKE,PS

¶18

919-PIL.90.2010.doc

¶19

Petition No.3246 of 2004 (PIL No. 86 of 2006) and in pursuance to the Government Letter dated 11^th February, 2009 notifying privately owned lands under mangroves as ‘Forest’, the Report dated 15^th June, 2009 prepared by Grievance Redressal Committee by virtue thereof the land bearing Survey No.344 CTS No.1 situate at village Dahisar, Taluka Borivali, Mumbai Suburban District was found to be under mangroves and the letter dated 27^th July, 1997 addressed by the collector, MSD to the Government of Maharashtra in the Revenue Department inter alia stating therein that said land belonging to the Respondent No.1 to 9 are mangroves Forest is illegal, null and void and inter alia without legal effect. In the said Suit Plaintiff have also prayed for Order and decree against the State of Maharashtra, other Statutory Authorities and the Union of India to jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs.1000 crores as compensation/ damages in respect of the said land to the Respondent No. 1 to 9.”

¶20

In view of these statements, which amount to an undertaking given to this court, there is no question of manufacturing of salt in the concerned land and once this activity has stopped, the assurance is that there would be no destruction or damage to mangroves.

¶21

In the light of this affidavit, the PIL can be disposed of. Needles to clarify that the PIL was specific and the prayer therein was restricted to the manufacturing of salt on the concerned land, which activity affects adversely the mangroves. Once this activity has been stopped completely, the PIL has worked itself out. It is disposed of accordingly.

¶22

(R.I.CHAGLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶23

Page 2 of 2

¶24

J.V.SALUNKE,PS

New Link Road Residents Forum v. Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia and 15 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

New Link Road Residents Forum v. Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia and 15 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shramik Mukti Sanghatana Vs M/S F.A. Enterprises Tps and Ors.

Sachin Bhimrao Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nanasaheb Babasaheb Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

High Court on Its Own Motion Vs Union of India and 6 Ors.

Pramod S/O Shankarrao Junghare Vs Union of India, Thr. Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change,New Delhi and or

Mah. Rajya Karmachari Mahasangh (Prop.) Thru Shri. Mukund H. Jadwar vs Chief Secretary, State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Parvez Razak Darvesh vs Dilawar Daud Gaonkhadkar and Ors.

Mr. Tekchand Gopaldas Khanchandani Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Satish Fatechand Kamdar Vs State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Shramik Mukti Sanghatana Vs M/S F.A. Enterprises Tps and Ors.

High Court on Its Own Motion Vs Union of India and 6 Ors.

Shriniwas Sabaji Naikdhure Vs Devayani Dilip Pawar and Ors.

Gaurav Rajendra Chaudhari Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Krishnali Resorts Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd.