Bombay High Court upholds Gateway jetty project, dismisses petitions citing environmental concerns
Dismissing the petitions, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V. Marne ruled that the project was lawfully cleared by the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) under the 2019 CRZ notification.
'The pursuit of development is not an affront to the environment when it walks the careful path of sustainability, guarded by regulations and reason. After traversing the entire expanse of material on record, expert opinions, statutory clearances and upon weighing the scales between the progress and preservation and taking into account the fact that the project stands fortified by statutory clearance, we uphold the validity of the decision of MMB and the State Government in constructing the project i.e. 'Passenger Jetty and Terminal Facilities' in sea face/promenade abutting the Gateway of India near the Radio Club,' the court observed.
The Bench further said that they have already assigned reasons in the preceding paragraphs to record a conclusion that the dominant purpose of the project is to provide facilities to the passengers for embarkation and disembarkation.
The other facilities like amphitheatre and restaurant/cafe are only ancillary to the project. Therefore, the same has to be used only to make passenger jetty functional, the Bench said.
'We are also conscious of the fact that there is no sewage treatment plant envisaged in the project. The functioning of the facilities should not be detrimental to the environment,' the Bench observed and issued directions:
The project proponent i.e. MMB shall ensure that the amphitheatre shall only be used as a sitting area by the passengers waiting to board the jetty and shall not be used as a place of entertainment in any manner.
The MMB shall further ensure that the proposed restaurant/cafe shall be used only to provide water and packed food products to the passengers and shall not be used for providing a dining facility.
The MMB shall also ensure that after completion of the project at the Gateway of India, the existing jetties shall be discontinued in a phased manner, as directed by the Indian Navy, the Bench said and disposed of the petitions.
The verdict came in response to three writ petitions filed by the Clean and Heritage Colaba Residents Association, Dr. Laura D'Souza and others, and Shabnam Minwalla and others, who raised strong objections against the project on environmental, heritage, and procedural grounds.
The proposed project involves the construction of a terminal platform of 80x80 metres with facilities such as a VIP lounge, food court, cafe, and a parking space for 150 cars. A 'tennis racquet-shaped' jetty extending 570 metres into the sea and a width of 203 metres with 10 boarding platforms, as well as an open-air amphitheatre on stilts, forms the core of the design. The total built-up area is over 25,116 sq. metres.
Petitioners claimed the project falls in the ecologically sensitive CRZ-I and CRZ-IV zones and would adversely impact the environment, marine ecology, and heritage aesthetics of the area.
The petitioners sought to quash and set aside the March 2, 2023, order passed by the MCZMA granting clearance to the project. They also sought to quash and set aside the January 28, 2025, 'No Objection Certificate' by the Mumbai Traffic Police and a February 7, 2025, 'No Objection Certificate' issued by the Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC) and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), to the project.
Senior advocates Aspi Chinoy, Sunip Sen, and Shiraz Rustomjee, representing the petitioners, argued that the project was wrongly classified as a 'standalone jetty' to bypass environmental scrutiny. They contended that in a September 2000 interim report submitted by Consulting Engineers, it was found that Off Arthur Bunder Road, South of Sassoon Dock, Nariman Point, Cuffee Parade and Trombay were not suitable and feasible and recommended the location of the proposed project at Ferry Wharf as a more appropriate location, however, the MMB disagreed with the findings of the report and said the Consulting Engineers lack professional approach. The State government too did not agree to the report, and on November 9, 2001, it said that the terminal at the Gateway of India is still needed and the project cannot be set up at Ferry Wharf alone.
The petitioners argued, 'The decision of the State Government and the MMB to construct the project is ex-facie irrational, arbitrary and violative of rights of the members of the petitioner association, which are guaranteed to them under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the project in question will excessively and needlessly affect the environment.'
'The project has a built-up area of 25116 sq. metres and will envelope a sea area of approximately 15 acres. It is urged that the aforesaid project is located in ecologically sensitive CRZ-I and CRZ-IV areas and therefore, it casts a heavy onus on the State Government and the MMB to justify the location of the project and the public interest involved therein. It is argued that the proposed design envelopes 12 acres of sea area with no additional facilities on the inner side of the proposed Jetty,' the petition read.
The petitioners contended that the Consulting Engineers had conducted a detailed study at the instance of MPT and the State Government concluded that the ferry wharf site is a suitable location for the construction of a passenger jetty. 'Without conducting any further expert study/report, the MMB has proceeded to locate the project in the sea off the road near Radio Club,' the petitioners argued.
Advocate General Birendra Saraf for MMB submitted that the petitioners are neither aggrieved by the location of the project nor by the concept of the project. 'The project seeks to address an urgent need for a safe, modern and properly equipped jetty facility for improving connectivity between the mainland and other areas, including Navi Mumbai, Mandwa (Alibaug) and Elephanta Island, etc. and to decongest the passenger and road traffic right next to the iconic Gateway of India monument.'
Mr. Saraf further argued that there are five operational antiquated jetties which have been in use for almost a century and approximately 30 to 35 lakh passengers travel every year through the aforesaid jetties. 'The existing facilities are unable to handle the passenger traffic and provide proper berthing for ferries and yachts.'
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
Cong slams IPB nod for resort, parking lot in ESZ at Reis Magos
Panaji: Congress has opposed the Goa Investment Promotion and Facilitation Board's decision to permit Spark Healthline Pvt Ltd to set up a resort and a multi-storeyed parking lot at Reis Magos. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The party said that the land falls under an eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) as per the Regional Plan 2021. The criticism comes after govt ratified the Goa IPB's notification of a 31,280sqm land parcel as an investment promotion area. The state Congress has accused govt of going against the wishes of local residents and ignoring gram sabha resolutions passed during the previous year. 'There's no plan for the contract given to these private players. There's no transparency on how projects are getting approved and who is approving them. Govt is scamming the villagers,' said Tulio DeSouza. Congress also accused chief minister Pramod Sawant of destroying eco-sensitive zones and areas falling under the CRZ under RP 2021, making false promises to the residents about providing employment.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Indian Hotels net profit rises 26.56% to ₹329 crore in Q1 FY26
NEW DELHI: Tata Group-owned Indian Hotels Company Limited (IHCL) on Thursday reported a 26.56 per cent rise in its consolidated net profit to Rs 329.32 crore in the first quarter of FY26. The country's biggest hospitality player posted a net profit of Rs 260.19 crore in the corresponding period of the previous financial year. Its total income from operations stood at Rs 2,102.17 crore during the April-June quarter, against Rs 1,596.27 crore in the year-ago period. The company's total expenses also increased to Rs 1,662.35 crore, from Rs 1,267.78 crore a year ago, a regulatory filing showed. "Q1 FY2026 marks the thirteenth consecutive quarter of record performance. In line with our guidance, the company reported a double-digit growth in consolidated revenue," Puneet Chhatwal, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of IHCL, said in a statement. Revenue from the hotel segment grew by 14 per cent to Rs 1,814 crore, leading to a strong EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortisation) margin of 31.4 per cent, the statement said. "This performance was enabled by diversification of our top line across same-store hotels, not like-for-like growth and New Businesses consolidated revenue growing by 27 per cent over the previous year. The hospitality sector, despite geopolitical headwinds, continues to show resilience and sustained growth," Chhatwal said. Further, he said IHCL continued its growth momentum with 12 signings, taking the portfolio to over 390 hotels and opened six new hotels in the quarter under review. He told PTI that recent incidents, including the airline tragedy in Gujarat, Operation Sindoor or the Middle East conflict, have cost the company 2.5-3 per cent topline. "Whether it is an unfortunate airline tragedy in Gujarat or it is Operation Sindoor or the Middle East led to a lot of cancellations. "However, the demand came back very will be fair to say, around what we are communicating as a guidance, is 2.5-3 per cent of the top line was lost because of these disturbances during the first quarter of this fiscal," he added. He said IHCL continued its growth momentum with 12 signings, taking the portfolio to over 390 hotels, and opened 6 new hotels in the quarter. When asked about Taj Bandstand, Chhatwal said, the hotel will take maybe 4 years to complete. "In the interim, we have received the MOEF (Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change) and CRZ (Coastal Regulation Zone) approval, the commencement certificate (CC), the litigation on the public interest litigation (PIL) and the height from the airport (authorities) are left. We only want 15 meters more. "And CC is the formality. The only thing that needs to be removed now is to get rid of PIL, with the help of the government," he added. Talking about hotel openings, he said, last year IHCL signed 74 agreements and this year the company will definitely open 13 properties. "September to March will be very high in openings, which is also good because, again, the second half is a better time for most of the locations. "We are also evaluating and looking at other inorganic opportunities as we are debt-free and we have a lot of cash reserves," Chhatwal added. Talking about overseas plans, he said, it is limited to the Taj brand. "In 3 months, we are opening two Taj properties in Bhutan, Phobjikha and Paro (Nepal). These are Brownfield projects. We are under development in Bahrain and in Saudi Arabia. We will open, by the end of January 2026, a Taj hotel in Frankfurt (Germany). So, our overseas expansion is limited to the Taj brand," he said. On taking the rest of the IHCL brands overseas, he said, "Maybe in 2-3 years if opportunities come up. But first, we need to establish the presence of the Taj."
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
ABD barred from launching disputed brands; Bombay HC rules in favour of Tilaknagar Industries
The Bombay High Court has restrained Allied Blenders & Distillers (ABD) from launching 'Mansion House' and 'Savoy Club' spirits nationwide, overturning a previous order. This decision favors Tilaknagar Industries (TI), which has been marketing alcoholic beverages under those trademarks in India for over 40 years. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has restrained Kishore Chhabria-led Allied Blenders & Distillers (ABD) from launching 'Mansion House' and 'Savoy Club' spirits anywhere in the country, setting aside a recent single bench order that allowed it to sell these brands in West Bengal. Tilaknagar Industries (TI), which markets and sells brandy and whisky under the Mansion House brand, had sought the court's intervention to restrain ABD, Herman Jansen Beverages Nederland BV, and UTO Asia Pte Ltd from manufacturing, marketing, or selling alcoholic products under the trademarks Mansion House and Savoy Club."The balance of convenience is clearly against UTO and in favour of Tilaknagar," a division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne said in its order issued on Wednesday. "In order to avoid confusion in the minds of the customers, which is also in the public interest, the two rival entities cannot be allowed to manufacture and sell products under the same marks, particularly when UTO has not sold a single bottle of alcohol in India under the impugned marks for 38 long years," it said in its 83-page in a stock exchange filing on Thursday said, "The company is considering to challenge the order."The dispute has been going on for over 17 years UTO-which ABD acquired from Herman Jansen last month for ₹1.22 million, or about ₹12 crore-owns worldwide rights in Mansion House and Savoy Club brands, excluding certain territories such as China and most of Southeast had in 1987 signed an agreement with UTO (Herman Jansen) for the ownership rights of Mansion House brandy and Savoy Club gin in India. The Dutch side, however, argued that the arrangement was never legally solemnised and filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against TI in 2008, when Mansion House brandy emerged as a formidable brand in December 2011, the Bombay HC held that Tilaknagar had the ownership rights to Mansion House in India, but Herman Jansen filed an appeal against it before a division 2014, ABD bought 50% ownership rights for Mansion House and Savoy Club brands from Herman Jansen and signed a licensing deal to produce and sell them in the challenged February this year, Bombay High Court's Justice Riyaz Chagla allowed ABD and Herman Jansen to launch Mansion House brandy and Savoy Club gin in West Bengal, observing that "there is no apparent similarity between the ABD's label and Tilaknagar's mark" and that ABD has been able to establish that its products will compete in a different market segment of high-end alcoholic beverages Tilaknagar challenged the order before a division bench, which has now set it contacted, Tilaknagar's legal head Savitrii Dadhich confirmed the development but refused to divulge any firm, through senior counsels Ravi Kadam and Venkatesh Dhond, had argued that it has marketed and sold alcoholic beverages under Mansion House and Savoy Club trademarks in India for over 40 years.
