Latest news with #CHCRA
Hindustan Times
23-06-2025
- General
- Hindustan Times
Colaba residents challenge legality of heritage clearance for jetty plan near Gateway
MUMBAI: The Citizens for Heritage Conservation and Residents' Association (CHCRA) has challenged the heritage clearance granted by the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC) and the BMC to the proposed construction of a large passenger jetty and terminal along the seafront between Radio Club and the Gateway of India. Residents of Colaba held a silent protest march on May 3 against the proposed jetty between Radio Club and Gateway Of India, at Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Statue, Churchgate in Mumbai, India, on Saturday, May 3, 2025. (Photo by Anshuman Poyrekar/ Hindustan Times) (Hindustan Times) In an affidavit-in-rejoinder filed on June 20, CHRCA president Subhash Motwani alleged that the heritage NOC issued by the deputy municipal architect on February 7, 2025, was illegal and ex facie ultra vires. He argued that under the Development Control and Promotion Regulation (DCPR) 2034, specifically Regulation 52(9), the authority to grant such permission rests solely with the municipal commissioner, and only after due consultation with the MHCC. The project in question proposes a terminal facility measuring approximately 84,000 square feet with a frontage of 250 feet and a height of 15 feet above road level. It includes a massive passenger jetty, extending 650 metres into the sea, with a width of 203 meters and a height of five feet above the road level. The jetty will envelop a sea area of approximately 4,85,000 square feet or 20 times the area occupied by the Gateway of India. The petitioners argue that allowing such an enormous structure in close proximity to iconic Grade I heritage monuments like the Gateway of India and the old wing of the Taj Mahal Hotel is entirely incompatible with their historic and architectural character and will overwhelm the visual prominence of these heritage sites, obstruct important views, and permanently alter the cultural landscape of the Apollo Bunder waterfront. The affidavit points out that MHCC has ignored regulations which mandate that new development in heritage precincts must not mar the grandeur, scale, or setting of Grade I structures. It also highlights that the jetty design lacks functional justification, pointing out that the outer rim will host the boarding platforms, but the entire 12-acre sea area enclosed by the structure will have no practical use, effectively wasting public maritime space and contravening principles of sustainable development. Traffic congestion along P J Ramchandani Marg is another major concern raised in the rejoinder. The road, already under constant strain from regular traffic, has little to no scope for expansion due to its location between the sea and residential buildings. Contrary to MHCC's claim that congestion has been addressed through the provision of an additional lay-by or drop-off lane, the petitioners argue that no viable road widening is possible, and the additional traffic from a terminal of this size would only worsen an already precarious situation. CHCRA submitted that the BMC's heritage clearance was bad in law, illegal and required to be quashed and set aside.
Hindustan Times
16-06-2025
- Hindustan Times
Colaba residents renew legal challenge to jetty project near Gateway of India
MUMBAI: The Clean Heritage Colaba Residents Association (CHCRA) has filed a rejoinder—a formal reply to a previous statement—before the Bombay High Court, challenging the Maharashtra Maritime Board's (MMB) plan to build a passenger jetty and terminal near the Gateway of India. Represented by CHCRA president Subhash Motwani, the association argues that the proposed 15-acre project violates environmental regulations and undermines heritage conservation norms. The site falls within the ecologically sensitive Coastal Regulation Zone-I and IV (CRZ-I and CRZ-IV) and is located in the buffer zone of the Gateway of India, a Grade I heritage monument. The proposed terminal features a sprawling, tennis racquet-shaped jetty, complete with VIP lounges, restaurants, an amphitheatre, and a sewage treatment plant—facilities the residents claim are excessive and environmentally damaging. CHCRA points to a 2000 study by Howe India (P) Ltd., commissioned by the Mumbai Port Trust (MbPT), which had rejected the same location due to poor accessibility and environmental risks. The study instead recommended Ferry Wharf—a dock in Mazgaon historically used for passenger services—as a more suitable site. The recommendation was accepted by both the MbPT and the state government at the time. However, the MMB revived the Colaba site proposal in 2014 and again in 2022 without conducting fresh feasibility studies or referring to the earlier expert findings. The residents have also raised serious concerns about the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports, calling them flawed and misleading. The reports, they say, misstate critical site details, ignore the impact on marine ecology, and fail to address the visual and cultural significance of the Gateway of India. In its affidavit, CHCRA has criticised the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) for approving the project under the category of a 'standalone jetty'—a classification that typically excludes terminals with commercial amenities. The association contends this is a deliberate mischaracterisation intended to sidestep stricter environmental clearance processes. Further, CHCRA alleges that the approval process lacked public transparency, bypassing mandatory hearings and community notifications, thereby violating environmental due process. In its rejoinder, the association argues that MMB has failed to justify the change in site or address concerns about traffic congestion, ecological harm, and the visual degradation of Mumbai's historic waterfront. The petition also invokes Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, arguing that the project infringes on citizens' fundamental rights to a clean environment and heritage protection. Although preliminary piling has begun—with two steel piles already driven into the seabed—major construction is yet to start. The petitioners maintain that the project is not 'well underway' as claimed by MMB. They further argue that the planned 64,000 sq ft development—with its cafés, lounges, parking spaces, and large reclaimed sea area—goes far beyond the scope of a standalone jetty and requires full-scale environmental clearance. Concerns have also been raised about the lack of a new traffic impact assessment, especially given the persistent congestion on PJ Ramchandani Marg, the narrow road leading to the Gateway. The heritage NOC (No Objection Certificate), the petition says, fails to consider the visual intrusion on the iconic monument and its surroundings. CHCRA also questions the need for enclosing large stretches of the sea and warns that piling vibrations may damage nearby heritage structures. Advocate Prerak Choudhary, representing CHCRA. 'We have filed our rejoinder in response to the Maharashtra Maritime Board's affidavit. Since the matter is sub judice, we will present our full arguments before the court.' The next hearing is scheduled for Monday.
Hindustan Times
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC clarifies that Bombay HC to decide Gateway of India jetty case on merits
MUMBAI: The Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that the Bombay High Court is free to proceed uninfluenced by its earlier observations in the ongoing case against the ₹299-crore passenger jetty project near the Gateway of India, a heritage monument. Declining to intervene, the apex court directed the High Court to hear the matter expeditiously and adjudicate all issues raised, including the legality of piling work into the seabed. The clarification comes two days after the top court declined to stay the contentious project, observing on Tuesday that the jetty served a larger public interest. Instead of passing interim orders, the court urged the High Court to swiftly conclude hearings on pending petitions challenging the development. The latest Special Leave Petition (SLP) was filed by the Clean and Heritage Colaba Residents Association (CHCRA) through advocates Ayush Anand and Prerak Choudhary. The association challenged the High Court's May 7 interim order allowing the Maharashtra Maritime Board (MMB) to continue concrete piling work near the Radio Club area. CHCRA contended that the construction poses a serious risk to the historic seaside heritage wall adjacent to the Gateway of India. The petition questioned whether the High Court had erred in failing to weigh the balance of convenience and the potential for irreversible damage to the site. Earlier, on May 2, the High Court had recorded an assurance from the Advocate General of Maharashtra that the heritage wall would not be disturbed until June 20. The court scheduled the next hearing for June 16. However, piling activity reportedly began the very next day, on May 3, prompting CHCRA to seek an urgent stay, which the High Court declined on May 7. Accusing the authorities of attempting to bypass the court's interim protections, CHCRA approached the Supreme Court, seeking an ex parte interim stay and a direction restraining the state government from initiating any coercive action against petitioners. The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih rejected the challenge without commenting on the merits of the case. It noted that the observations made in a related petition filed earlier by Dr Laura D'Souza would apply equally in this matter. Dr D'Souza's petition—filed through advocate Anagha S Desai of Desai Legal LLP—had similarly contested the High Court's refusal to stay the preparatory works, arguing that the project commenced without adequate public consultation and would adversely affect over 2.1 lakh residents in the Colaba area.
Hindustan Times
26-05-2025
- General
- Hindustan Times
Second residents' body moves SC against jetty project at Gateway of India
MUMBAI: A second residents' association has approached the Supreme Court, challenging the Bombay High Court's refusal to halt the construction of a jetty project near the Gateway of India. The Clean and Heritage Colaba Residents Association (CHCRA) has filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the High Court's interim order dated May 7, 2025, which allowed concrete piling work at the seabed near Radio Club to proceed. This comes a week after the Cuffe Parade Residents' Association president moved the apex court with a similar petition. CHCRA's petition, filed through advocates Ayush Anand and Prerak Choudhary, argues that the construction work poses a serious threat to the seaside heritage wall near the Gateway of India and questions whether the High Court erred in failing to weigh the balance of convenience and the potential for irreparable damage. Earlier, in its May 2 order, the High Court had recorded an assurance from the Advocate General of Maharashtra that the heritage wall would not be touched before June 20, 2025. The court had scheduled the next hearing for June 16. However, the Maharashtra Maritime Board (MMB) began piling work—a process involving fixing concrete piles into the seabed—the very next day, on May 3. CHCRA has alleged that this move was aimed at bypassing the interim protection granted by the court. The association subsequently filed an application seeking a stay on all piling activity, but the High Court dismissed it on May 7. The petition also challenges the project's compliance with environmental regulations. It points out that the 2022 Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notification only permits 'stand-alone jetties' in CRZ-I and CRZ-IV areas. In contrast, the current proposal seeks clearance for 10 jetties, which CHCRA describes as 'ex facie illegal and impermissible'. The petition further contends that the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) and the MMB have approved the Passenger Jetty and Terminal Facilities project without adequately considering objections from local residents and stakeholders. It cites Rule 8(V) of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Rules, which requires that public concerns be addressed before such approvals are granted. Additionally, the association has raised concerns over the MCZMA's alleged failure to acknowledge the presence of the heritage seawall—a significant feature of the Gateway of India precinct. Demolition of this wall, the petition argues, would cause irreversible harm to the city's architectural legacy. Accusing the High Court of overlooking the heritage concerns, CHCRA has urged the Supreme Court to grant an ex parte interim stay on the May 7 order and to restrain the state government from taking any coercive action against the petitioners.
