In ‘exceptional’ call, Bombay High Court allows felling of 847 mangrove trees for bullet train-linked project
The Bombay High Court clears felling of 847 mangroves for Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train-linked transmission project undertaken by MahaTransco, and gives the state four weeks to fix its afforestation tracking.
In December 2025, the Bombay HC permitted the felling of 45,675 mangroves for Versova Bhayandar Coastal Road project, while accepting compensatory afforestation in Chandrapur, more than 800 km away. (Express photo by Sankhadeep Banerjee)
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday cleared the felling of 847 mangrove trees for infrastructure linked to the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train project, but used the case to send a wider message: compensatory afforestation cannot become a numbers game, and planting trees hundreds of kilometres away does not make up for local ecological loss.
Calling the clearance an “exceptional measure”, the court made it clear that the order should not be treated as a precedent for future projects. It also pulled up the Maharashtra government for failing to implement reforms it had directed nearly a year ago to make compensatory afforestation more transparent and ecologically meaningful.
The observations came in a verdict by a bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad on a plea by Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. (MahaTransco), which sought permission to fell 847 mangrove trees to build a 132 KV transmission line and substation “integral” to the bullet train corridor. The project requires diversion of 3.35 hectares of forest land, including nearly two hectares of mangroves, and was treated by the court as one of “national importance”.
The dispute centred on the state’s proposal to compensate for the loss by planting 7,457 non-mangrove trees over 6.71 hectares in Sangola, Solapur district, about 400 km away. Bombay Environmental Action Group, an environment group, argued that plantations so far from the affected site could not restore the ecological functions lost in Palghar.
Agreeing with that principle, the court cited a Supreme Court ruling in MC Mehta case to reiterate that compensatory afforestation is meant to restore ecosystems, not merely replace the number of trees cut.”Compensatory afforestation is not intended to be a mere numerical replacement of trees felled for a project. Its purpose is ecological restoration. Plantation undertaken hundreds of kilometres away may satisfy a statistical requirement, but fails to restore the environmental benefits of the affected locality,” the bench observed.
Despite this, the court allowed the project to proceed because of additional commitments made by MahaTransco. Besides, the statutory plantation in Solapur, the company undertook to plant 26,664 mangrove saplings near Thane, much closer to the affected site. The bench “did not intend to interfere” with expert bodies’ assessment, granting an exception on “categorical assurances”.
The judges also criticised the state for failing to comply with their September 2025 directions to create afforestation land banks, publish plantation data and establish a monitoring mechanism. Describing the delay as “continuing default” and “administrative apathy”, they directed the Chief Secretary to ensure compliance within four weeks, warning that without such reforms, compensatory afforestation would remain a “theoretical exercise”.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
