Supreme Court Allows Felling of 84 Trees for Mumbai Metro Project: In Re Felling of Trees in Aarey Forest (2022)

Date of the Judgment: 29 November 2022

Citation: Not Available

Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J

The Supreme Court of India addressed a critical issue regarding the felling of trees in the Aarey forest for the Mumbai Metro Line-3 project. The core question was whether to allow the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) to cut down 84 trees for the project’s shunting area, considering environmental concerns and the project’s public interest. This judgment is authored by the Chief Justice of India, Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, with Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha concurring.

Case Background

The case revolves around the construction of a car depot for Mumbai Metro Line-3 in the Aarey forest. Initially, the Supreme Court declined to grant interim relief to stop the construction activities in Aarey Colony on April 15, 2019. Later, on October 7, 2019, the Court, in a Suo Moto Writ Petition, recorded that the State of Maharashtra would not fell any further trees. The Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) sought permission to fell 84 trees for the shunting area of the car depot. The court was also seized of other IAs seeking declaration of Aarey as forest and restraining construction activities.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

Initially, the Supreme Court declined to grant interim relief to stop the construction activities in Aarey Colony. Subsequently, the court took suo motu cognizance of the matter. The State Government, after initially considering an alternate site at Kanjurmarg based on a committee report, reversed its decision following a communication from the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. This communication highlighted the operational and maintenance constraints of shifting the depot to Kanjurmarg. The MMRCL then sought permission to fell 84 trees for the shunting area, leading to the current proceedings.

Legal Framework

The case involves the interpretation and application of the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act 1975. This act governs the felling of trees in urban areas and requires permission from the Tree Authority. The court also considered the broader principles of sustainable development and the need to balance environmental concerns with public interest in infrastructure projects. The court also took into account the notification issued on 12 October 2020, under which 286 hectares of land have been notified as forests.

Arguments

Arguments by MMRCL:

• The Solicitor General, representing MMRCL, argued that the Metro project is of significant public interest, with a cost of approximately Rs 23,000 crores, now projected to escalate to Rs 37,000 crores.
• He stated that nearly 95% of the project work has been completed.
• Permission had already been granted for felling 2,185 trees for the car depot and 235 for the ramp. They sought permission to move the Tree Authority for the felling of 84 trees for the shunting area.
• Given the project’s public interest, the court should allow MMRCL to move the Tree Authority for permission to fell the 84 trees.

Arguments by the Opposing Counsel:

• Senior Counsel Mr. C.U. Singh and Ms. Anitha Shenoy argued against allowing the felling of trees and opposed the State Government’s decision to allow the car depot project at Aarey.
• They argued that the State Government’s decision on July 21, 2022, reversed a considered view taken on March 23, 2021, which accepted the Expert Committee’s report of January 21, 2021.
• The Expert Committee’s decision was based on the fact that the capacity of the car shed at Aarey would be exhausted by 2031, necessitating the felling of an additional 1000 trees for future expansion.
• They contended that there was no valid basis to rescind the decision without scientific evidence suggesting a contrary view was more desirable.
• They also highlighted the ecological sensitivity of the area due to its proximity to the Sanjay Gandhi National Park, which is rich in biodiversity.
• Ms. Anitha Shenoy added that the Metro Line project has high pollution potential and that 286 hectares of land had been notified as forests on 12 October 2020.

Submissions Table

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame issues in a separate section. However, the core issue before the court was:

1. Whether the Tree Authority should be permitted to decide the application dated 11.02.2019 filed by MMRCL for felling of 84 trees.
2. Whether the court should allow the Aarey car shed project to proceed, or if the decision of the State Government to allow the project should be stayed.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The court did not explicitly cite specific cases or books in this order. However, it considered the following:

• The report of the Technical Committee chaired by the Metropolitan Commissioner, MMRDA, which was accepted by the State Government on 16 October 2015.
• The report of the Committee chaired by the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, dated 21 January 2021.
• The communication from the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs dated 17 March 2022.
• The notification issued on 12 October 2020, under which 286 hectares of land have been notified as forests.

Authorities Table

Judgment

How each submission made by the Parties was treated by the Court?

How each authority was viewed by the Court?

• The Technical Committee Report of 2015 was considered as the basis for the initial decision to locate the depot.
• The Committee Report of 2021 was considered as the basis for the State Government’s decision to relocate the depot, which was later reversed.
• The Union Ministry’s communication was given significant weight, highlighting the operational constraints of shifting the depot and the advanced stage of the project.
• The notification of 286 hectares of land as forests was considered but did not outweigh the public interest in the project.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the following factors:

• The substantial public investment already made in the project.
• The advanced stage of the project, with 95% of the work completed.
• The operational and maintenance constraints of shifting the depot to Kanjurmarg, as highlighted by the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.
• The fact that a significant number of trees had already been felled for the car shed and ramp.
• The need for the ramp to make the completed work effective.

Fact:Law Ratio

The court’s reasoning was primarily based on the factual circumstances of the project’s progress and the practical implications of halting it. The legal considerations, while present, were secondary to the factual matrix.

Logical Reasoning

Judgment

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, allowed MMRCL to pursue its application before the Tree Authority for the felling of 84 trees required for the shunting area of the Metro Line-3 car depot. The Court clarified that the Tree Authority is at liberty to take an independent decision on the application and determine what conditions, if any, should be imposed if it decides to grant permission. The court modified its previous order, which had directed the preservation of the status quo on the felling of trees, to the extent of allowing MMRCL to move the Tree Authority. The State Government was also allowed to proceed further with the project.

The court stated, “In such projects involving large outlay of public funds, the Court cannot be oblivious to the serious dislocation which would be caused if the public investment which has gone into the project were to be disregarded.” The court also noted, “Having regard to the entirety of the material before it, if the State Government has come to the conclusion that the original decision to allow the Metro car depot for Metro Line- 3 be located at Aarey has to be restored, it would not be possible for the Court at the interim stage to stay the decision.” Further, the court observed, “It needs no emphasis that without a ramp the work which has already been completed would be of no consequence and would be wholly ineffective.”

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court has allowed MMRCL to apply to the Tree Authority for permission to fell 84 trees for the Mumbai Metro Line-3 project.
• The Tree Authority will make an independent decision on the application.
• The court considered the public interest, the advanced stage of the project, and the practical implications of halting it.
• The judgment highlights the tension between environmental concerns and the need for infrastructure development.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that the Tree Authority is at liberty to take an independent decision on the application filed by MMRCL for the felling of 84 trees and determine what conditions, if any, should be imposed if it decides to grant its permission.

Development of Law

This judgment does not introduce any new legal principles. The ratio decidendi is that in projects with significant public interest and investment, the court will consider the practical implications of halting the project at an advanced stage. The court also reiterated the principle of sustainable development, balancing environmental concerns with the need for infrastructure.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision allows the Mumbai Metro Line-3 project to proceed by permitting MMRCL to seek permission from the Tree Authority to fell 84 trees for the shunting area. This judgment highlights the delicate balance between environmental protection and the execution of public infrastructure projects, emphasizing the importance of considering the practical aspects and public interest involved.

Category

Parent Category: Environmental Law

Child Categories:

• Infrastructure Projects
• Tree Felling
• Sustainable Development
• Aarey Forest
• Mumbai Metro
• Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act 1975

Parent Category: Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act 1975

Child Categories:

• Permission for Tree Felling

FAQ

Q: What was the main issue in this Supreme Court case?

A: The main issue was whether the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) should be allowed to fell 84 trees in the Aarey forest for the construction of a car depot for the Mumbai Metro Line-3 project.

Q: What did the Supreme Court decide?

A: The Supreme Court allowed MMRCL to apply to the Tree Authority for permission to fell the 84 trees. The Tree Authority will make an independent decision on the application.

Q: Why did the court allow the felling of trees?

A: The court considered the public interest in the project, the advanced stage of the project, and the practical implications of halting it. The court also noted that a significant number of trees had already been felled.

Q: What is the role of the Tree Authority?

A: The Tree Authority is responsible for deciding whether to grant permission for the felling of trees in urban areas. In this case, it will make an independent decision on MMRCL’s application.

Q: What does this mean for the Mumbai Metro project?

A: This decision allows the Mumbai Metro Line-3 project to proceed, but the final decision on the felling of the 84 trees rests with the Tree Authority.