Bombay High Court Clears Critical Power Infrastructure Project In Mangrove Zones

Prioritizing regional power stability over procedural environmental hurdles, the Bombay High Court has cleared the decks for a massive 80-kilometer transmission line through protected forest and mangrove zones in Palghar. The ruling establishes a rigorous ten-year monitoring mechanism to ensure that industrial expansion does not come at the cost of irreparable ecological degradation.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad presided over the matter, evaluating the necessity of a 132 KV transmission line intended for the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA). The Court examined the tension between infrastructure needs and the protection of mangroves, ultimately granting permission subject to stringent afforestation mandates.

Approval for Transmission Infrastructure in Sensitive Zones

The Petitioner sought the Court's leave to fell mangroves for the construction of a 132 KV D/C line from Dahanu to Suryanagar and Kavdas substations. This permission was mandatory following the landmark directions in Bombay Environmental Group and another vs. The State of Maharashtra and others, which prohibited construction within 50 meters of mangroves without judicial intervention. The project involves the diversion of 94.6802 hectares of land, including segments classified as reserved and private forests.

While the Petitioner contended that site inspections revealed several areas marked as 'mangroves' in government records were actually open lands, the Court maintained that strict adherence to the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and environmental protocols was non-negotiable. The State’s Mangrove Cell supported the project, noting that the Petitioner had already deposited over ₹30 crore into the CAMPA account for compensatory afforestation and net present value.

Mandatory Compliance and Judicial Oversight

The Court expressed its commitment to environmental preservation by incorporating conditions from previous precedents such as Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority v. Union of India & Ors. and Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation vs. Union of India & Others. These cases highlighted previous judicial dissatisfaction with the state of mangrove re-plantation in Maharashtra. To prevent similar lapses, the Bench directed the Petitioner to maintain the new plantations for a minimum of ten years.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "We are inclined to grant the relief sought only because of the categorical assurances furnished by the Petitioner and Respondent No.5 that both the mangrove plantation and the compensatory afforestation shall be undertaken in accordance with law and that the plantations shall thereafter be adequately protected, maintained and monitored so as to ensure their survival."

The Court has the following directions:

"(I) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant permission to the Petitioner, i.e., Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. (MSETCL) to remove/fell mangrove trees of 8.2188 ha. out of 94.6802 ha. in precise forming part of villages viz. Mankod, Sarwali, Agwan, Sawate, Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar for use of non-forest purpose under Forest Conservation Act, 1980 for forest land involved towards construction of 132 KV D/C Line... (II) The Petitioner to file an Interim Application every year for a period of ten years, on or before 12th January, placing on record a comprehensive status-cum-audit report from Respondent No.5 regarding the implementation of the afforestation and mangrove plantation programme... (III) Failure to file the Interim Application or the requisite compliance reports shall be treated as contempt of this Court."

Background:

The dispute originated from the Petitioner's requirement to expand the electricity transmission network in the Palghar district to support MMRDA infrastructure. Due to the presence of mangroves, the project fell under the restrictive ambit of the 2018 High Court judgment in Bombay Environmental Group and another vs. The State of Maharashtra and others. The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that they had secured Stage-I and Stage-II clearances from the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA). The project felling was limited to 8.2188 hectares of mangrove-related area, with a commitment to plant 1,11,100 new mangrove saplings across 25 hectares of degraded land to satisfy the 3:1 plantation ratio mandated by environmental regulations.

Case Details:
Case No.: WRIT PETITION NO. 13405 OF 2023
Case Title: Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Milind Sathe, Advocate General a/w Mr. S.D. Shetty, Mr. Rakesh Singh, Mr. Aditya, Mr. Ashitosh i/b M.V. Kini & Co.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rovie Bandekar with Ms. Sheetal Shah, Ms. Jaya Bajwe, Ms. Shruti Parab, Advocates for Respondent No.4-MCZMA; Mrs. Neha S. Bhide, GP with Mr. O.A. Chandurkar, AGP, Mrs. Sunita Prabhune, AGP, Ms Leena Patil, ‘B’ Panel Counsel for the Respondent-State.

Source: 2026 CaseBase(BOM) 947