26-05-2025
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.
