HC asks state govt to identify alternative lands for rehabilitation of SGNP slum dwellers

The court said that the state can also consider lands near Mumbai and parties should “resolve” the matter, failing which it will have to pass relevant orders.

A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad was hearing pleas including one by Samyak Janhit Seva Sanstha, an association of residents from slums at SGNP seeking alternative accommodation, along with a contempt petition by the NGO Conservation Action Trust alleging non-compliance with HC orders of 1997 and 2003 that directed authorities to clear the SGNP area and ensure no further encroachments.

On October 16, HC had constituted high-powered committee headed by Justice Dilip B Bhosale, former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court to suggest measures for removal of encroachments, rehabilitation of eligible persons and to ensure expeditious construction of a boundary wall around SGNP to prevent further encroachments.

The HC on Wednesday recorded clarification of Advocate General (AG) Birendra Saraf that out of the total land at suburban Marol-Maroshi identified by the state government, 44 acres land would be made available for residential development once zonal master plan is notified and embargo put by National Board  for Wildlife (NBW) in its meeting held on December 21, 2024 ceases to operate or is lifted.

The Board had taken a decision that the State Government shall prepare a Zonal Master Plan incorporating the provisions of eco-sensitive zone and that no projects of any nature shall be approved within the eco-sensitive zone falling in the regulated category till the approval of such a plan.

However, senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas for the petitioner association referred to an observation by the HC in its January 14 order expressing “dismay and astonishment” over state authorities being “lax” and “callous in attitude” since 1997 to comply with earlier HC orders. The HC had noted that the state government earlier taken a stand that construction activity in ESZ was a regulated activity and will be permitted in certain conditions

The lawyer for the intervenor referred to past Supreme Court orders stating that it has put a complete embargo on further felling of trees in Aarey forest.

However, AG Saraf argued that necessary approvals can be taken from necessary authorities wherever projects are proposed and if necessary permission of SC is also taken.

“It can’t be a possibility. Possibly tomorrow it (Marol Maroshi land parcel) will be declared as a reserve forest then goes out of your hands. Then this project is stuck,” CJ Chandrashekhar orally remarked.

“Having regard to the aforementioned complexity debated in this proceeding, we would request AG as we had done earlier to give details of alternative lands on which the rehabilitation scheme can be worked out,” the HC noted.

After AG Saraf expressed certain difficulties in identification of lands including their viability for any residential project, the HC noted,” If that is so, let there be three alternative sites of 90 acres each be identified and an affidavit be filed within two weeks. We may further indicate it is not necessary that alternative pieces of land must be in the vicinity of SGNP.”

Posting the matter to December 3, the bench clarified that the panel constituted as per October 16 order shall proceed with the matter and take appropriate decisions as indicated in the said order.