A new phase of resistance was recorded against the felling of 706 trees along the Eastern Express Highway (EEH), as a legal notice was issued to the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC). The notice was filed by activist-advocate Sagar Devre and was framed as a challenge to the environmental and procedural basis of the project. It was specified that a 12.95-km elevated road from Chedda Nagar in Ghatkopar to Anand Nagar in Mulund is being pursued as part of the Eastern Freeway’s expansion, which has already connected Mazgaon to Chedda Nagar over 16.8 km. In addition, an 8.24-km extension from Anand Nagar to Saket in Thane was indicated to be on the drawing board.
In the legal submission, it was alleged that the precautionary principle had been disregarded and that citizens’ right to a healthy environment had been placed at risk. It was further claimed that “all possible alternatives” to reduce tree loss had not been “genuinely explored,” and that alignment choices appeared to be driven by convenience rather than by sustainability. Concerns were also registered about the integrity of the public consultation process, which was described as “rushed and non-transparent,” echoing apprehensions often voiced during previous infrastructure rollouts in Mumbai.
Questions were raised about the efficacy of tree transplantation, as survival outcomes in the city were said to have been “as little as 20%.” Against that backdrop, compensatory promises were scrutinised not only for their numerical adequacy but for their ecological effectiveness, given the long timelines required for saplings to replace mature canopy cover.
In response, an official position from the MMRDA was communicated. It was stated that the design had been realigned to curb tree loss and that special attention had been accorded to the Pink Trumpet trees—widely recognised for their seasonal, cherry-blossom-like displays along the EEH. It was outlined that 4,175 saplings would be planted, 949 existing trees would be retained, and 386 would be transplanted as part of the mitigation plan. Through this stance, an attempt was made to demonstrate that ecological considerations had been integrated into the project design.
Meanwhile, continuing public sentiment was observed along the corridor, particularly in Vikhroli and adjoining neighbourhoods. For two consecutive weeks, objections were voiced and a redesign was sought so that the green avenues used by walkers, joggers, and cyclists could be protected. The Pink Trumpet-lined service roads were cited as a distinctive urban asset whose loss would be deeply felt by residents.
As the notice proceeds and formal responses are prepared, the project’s trajectory is expected to be shaped by legal scrutiny, environmental standards, and civic feedback. A broader question is being posed for Mumbai’s development model: whether infrastructure expansion can be reconciled with lasting protection of mature urban green cover, and whether mitigation by numbers can be matched by ecological outcomes on the ground.