Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the transfer of 255.9 acres of salt pan lands in eastern suburbs to the Maharashtra government for rehabilitation for Project Affected Persons (PAPs) affected by Dharavi redevelopment. The court noted that no material was placed on record to show that salt pan lands cannot be utilised for rehabilitation of PAPs.
A bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne said, “In our opinion, public interest would subserve if PAPs are rehabilitated.” The court held that the petition, filed by advocate and social activist Sagar Devre, lacked research and was filed in a "casual and cavalier manner".
Devre’s PIL had challenged two government resolutions (GRs) dated August 7 and September 30, 2024, approving the transfer of 255.6 acres of salt pan land in Mulund, Bhandup, and Vikhroli, from the central government to the state for rehabilitating residents displaced due to the Dharavi Redevelopment Project.
He had also questioned an Office Memorandum (OM) dated August 23, 2024, issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry’s Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, which facilitated the transfer.
The PIL argued that the move would damage the fragile coastal ecosystem and pointed to earlier policies – including a 2012 OM – that stated salt pan lands should not be used for other purposes. Devre also claimed the land fell under the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) and should be protected as wetlands.
However, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh countered that the salt pan lands had been excluded from the definition of wetlands under amended Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules 2017. He also told the court that the land was transferred to the state government with the condition that all environmental clearances would be obtained.
Singh contended that the petitioner had not conducted proper research and had relied on broad generalisations. “The petition is based on information he believes to be true. There is no concrete data,” Singh submitted.
The court observed that the PIL had not challenged the validity of the change in policy. The court concluded: “No material has been brought to our notice to demonstrate that salt pan land cannot be utilised for rehabilitation of PAPs. The PIL fails and is dismissed.” Needless to state that due consideration will be given to environmental related issues while implementing the project, the court concluded.
