Madh versova bridge gets Forest clearance, HC remains
The bridge now requires approval from the Bombay High Court to divert 2.7515 hectares of mangrove forest. In exchange for the diversion of the 2.75-hectare mangrove forest, the BMC has identified three hectares of land for afforestation, where it will plant three trees for each one that is sacrificed to make way for the bridge. Once HR clears, all that remains is land acquisition. The permission from the high court is expected to take two to three months, after which the BMC hopes to begin work on the bridge on the ground by October.
The bridge will be cable-stayed to reduce the number of pillars required in the mangroves, and subsequently the environmental impact. It will also connect to the Versova interchange at the north end of the Coastal Road. It has been in the works since the 1967 Development Plan.
Earlier this week, the MP Piyush Goyal met with the state minister of forests, Ganesh Naik, and called attention to the bridge, prompting the government to request permission from the MoEFCC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
7 hours ago
- Time of India
BMC urges agencies to clear piled-up construction debris
Bhubaneswar: The works department, Water Corporation of Odisha (Watco), power distribution company and even Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation (BMC) are among the agencies responsible for piling up of construction and demolition materials on several roads leading to public inconvenience, officials said. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now For piling up of construction and demolition (C&D) waste, BMC has a provision to impose fines. It also charges the cost of removal of C&D waste on individuals and institutions. "During my recent field visits, I saw that several agencies are piling up waste on roads and along roadsides. This practice poses a risk to commuters and affects the aesthetic beauty of the city. We will sensitise all the stakeholders carrying out various construction once again. If agencies do not adhere to the norms after that, they will be penalised, and the cost of lifting the waste will be recovered from them," said BMC commissioner Chanchal Rana. BMC officers said that according to the rules, waste generated through construction, repair, remodelling and demolition of private and govt establishments, households, roads and drains, should be handled properly to avoid litter. However, it has been observed that most govt establishments disregard the norms despite awareness drives being conducted before the launch of a special campaign from July 1, 2023. "The special drive against C&D waste is ongoing, and multiple squads are engaged in enforcing it," Rana added. A BMC squad is authorised to impose a penalty of Rs 5,000 on the owners of C&D waste. In addition, if the BMC removes the waste using its own tractor, it charges Rs 4,500 per trip. BMC has also earmarked designated dumping places, which have been identified based on the requirement of a particular place, such as low-lying areas and mine voids. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now For the designated dumping station, BMC has allowed people to transport the C&D waste instead of the civic body seizing the litter and penalising people. However, people are hardly implementing this practice. Debabrata Mohanty, managing director of Watco, said instructions have been issued to all general managers to oversee the removal of C&D waste from roads without further delay. "If waste is still piled up on the roads, BMC can identify those places and let us know, and we will remove them at our own cost," he told TOI.
Indian Express
14 hours ago
- Indian Express
Supreme Court paves the way for BMC to continue operations at Kanjurmarg landfill
In a much needed relief to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, the Supreme Court on Friday stayed the Bombay High Court verdict which had declared the Kanjurmarg landfill a 'protected forest' and allowed the civic body to continue operating the landfill here, which caters to nearly 90 per cent of the city's solid waste. While senior civic officials maintained that the BMC has no plans to explore alternative sites for a new dumping ground, the petitioner—who fought a 15-year-long legal battle—deemed the apex court's stay a case of 'environmental injustice'. Of the 6,500 metric tonnes (MT) of solid waste generated in Mumbai, nearly 5,900 metric tonnes of waste is processed at the Kanjurmarg dumping ground, which is Mumbai's sole sanitary landfill (SLF) or disposal facility. In what had nudged the BMC into a tight spot, the Bombay HC on May 2, declared a 119.91-hectare portion of the 141.77 hectare landfill at Kanjurmarg as a 'protected forest' under the forest conservation act (FCA) and forest act, quashing a 2009 notification of the state government that denotified the land parcel as a forest. The HC had granted the BMC three months to comply with the judgment. However, amid concerns of the city coming to a standstill with the closure of the largest landfill, the BMC had filed a special leave petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court. On Friday, the SC stayed the HC order that restored the Kanjurmarg landfill's forest status. Senior officials confirmed that the landfill will continue to cater to the city's solid waste with the BMC having no immediate plans of looking at alternative dumping sites. According to officials, for the future, the BMC has charted plans to install a 60 MW waste-to-energy plant to process dry waste at the Kanjurmarg site as well as install a 500 TPD plant for wet waste, which will generate approximately 16.25 tonnes of compressed biogas (CBG) per day. Stalin D , director of Vanashakti who had filed four different petitions against the dumpsite, said that the Supreme Court's stay was a case of 'environmental injustice'. 'Even though their petition was readied by July 7, we found out about the SLP, which was listed for Friday, only at 3pm on Thursday, after we asked for it. While this barely left us with any time to prepare, we were ready to fight virtually. However, even then, we did not get to argue our case. The HC had extensively studied and written the judgment after 10 months of hard work. However, it wasn't even read properly before it was trashed,' said Stalin, adding, 'In such cases, the environment is the petitioner in absentia and we are just the representatives. With the SC failing to even hear us, environmental justice was buried.'
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Maharashtra govt challenges Bombay high court's ‘Kanjurmarg landfill a protected forest' order in Supreme Court
Mumbai: State govt has moved Supreme Court in appeal against the Bombay high court order that declared 120 hectares of the Kanjurmarg dumping site a protected mangrove forest and ordered its restoration. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The land, which has been used as a scientifically operated solid waste ground landfill for Mumbai, receives more than 10,000 metric tonnes of municipal solid wastes every day. Acting on a 2005 HC order to protect mangroves, state notified over 425 hectares of Kanjurmarg land as 'protected forest'. But, in 2009, state de-notified almost 120 hectares from the 425 hectares to create the landfill. BMC, had along with state govt, challenged the protected forest status as a "mistake". In its special leave petition in SC, govt said HC has "erred in setting aside the notification dated Dec 29, 2009, issued by the state without considering that the same was issued in exercise of its rights under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 to correct the ex-facie evident error in the July 7, 2008 notification". Section 21 provides that where a power to issue notification is conferred, then that said power includes a power to amend, vary and rescind any notification. "The HC has erred in ignoring both prior and pursuant to the notification, various permissions from a sustainable development standpoint such as environmental clearances for carrying out the activity of waste disposal/landfills on the said lands have been received," the state said. The forest in question was never notified as a reserved forest. Further, the subject land came to be used as a waste disposal ground only after the rectification notification was issued and as such, the question of any diversion of a forest land for non-forest purposes did not arise, the state added.
