A significant environmental dispute linked to Mumbai’s Versova-Bhayander Link Road, also known as the Coastal Road North project, is set to be examined by the Supreme Court. A petition has been filed by environment NGO Vanashakti against the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s decision to begin the cutting of mangroves for the project. It has been stated by Stalin D, director of the NGO and petitioner in the case, that the matter is scheduled to be heard on Friday by a bench led by the Chief Justice of India. Through this petition, a strong challenge has been mounted against the legality of the action taken by the civic body.
The beginning of mangrove cutting has been defended by the BMC on the ground that only “surface-level mangrove cutting” has been started and that such work has been undertaken under “working permission” granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. It has also been said that the state forest department has been acting in coordination with the corporation. According to figures presented by the civic body, 45,675 mangroves spread across 103.65 hectares are to be affected by the project. Out of this total, around 9,000 mangroves are to be permanently cut, while 36,675 are proposed to be replanted in the “shadow area” after the road work is completed. This explanation has been presented by the authorities as part of an effort to show that ecological loss would be partly addressed through replantation.
However, serious objections have been raised by Vanashakti over both the process and the claimed safeguards. It has been argued that the commencement of mangrove cutting is in violation of “Section 2 of the Van Suraksha evam Samwardhan Adhiniyam, 1980” and also contrary to the Bombay High Court’s order dated “12.12.2025” in Writ Petition No. 3790 of 2025. By the NGO, it has further been alleged that the Bombay High Court is being “misguiding” by the BMC. In particular, attention has been drawn to an earlier direction under which the corporation had been asked to file an action report on the plantation of “1,37,764 compensatory mangroves’ sapling plantation.” According to the petitioner, that report has not yet been submitted.
The delay in filing the report has been turned into a major point of conflict. It has been claimed by Stalin D that the civic body is relying on an alleged verbal indication that the report may be filed only in January 2027. This explanation has been challenged by the NGO, which has suggested that the real reason for the non-submission is the allegedly “very poor” survival rate of earlier compensatory plantations, despite the corporation’s claim that survival has remained at “90%.” As a result, the effectiveness of compensatory plantation itself has been brought under scrutiny. Although the BMC has informed the high court that plantation equal to three times the affected green cover will be carried out in Chandrapur and Dahanu, doubts have continued to be expressed regarding how much of this plantation would actually survive over time.
The dispute has not remained confined to courtroom arguments alone. Notices have been issued by Vanashakti to the BMC and the state forest department demanding that mangrove cutting be stopped unless “final (Stage II) clearance” is formally obtained. It has been recorded that the first notice was served on February 3, while a reminder notice was sent on March 11. No reply to the first communication has yet been received, according to the NGO. Through these notices, it has been alleged that destruction of mangroves is being permitted without mandatory “Stage II forest clearance” under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
On the other hand, the civic body’s position has continued to be asserted firmly. By BMC officials, it has been said that Stage II forest clearance is expected “in a month” and that no legal violation has occurred in the surface-level cutting that has already begun at at least two locations. It has also been indicated that a formal response to the NGO’s notice is being examined by the legal department. Alongside the BMC, several other authorities have been named as respondents in the case, including the Union of India, Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority, State of Maharashtra, Additional Chief Conservator of Forest (Mangrove Cell), and Bombay Environmental Action Group. With the case now placed before the Supreme Court, a closer judicial examination of the balance between infrastructure expansion and environmental protection is expected to be carried out.