IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.11256 OF 2025

Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission ]

Company Limited ] .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Maharashtra, ]

Through the Office of Govt. Pleader, ]

High Court, Bombay ]

2. The Union of India, ]

Through the Ministry of Environment & Forest ]

3. Bombay Environmental Action Group, ]

Fort, Mumbai ]

4. Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management ]

Authority, Environment Department, Mumbai ]

5. Mangrove Cell, Mumbai ] .. Respondents

Dr. Milind Sathe, Advocate General, with Mr. Amogh Singh,

Mr. S.D. Shetty, Mr. Rakesh L. Singh, Mr. Aditya Mhase,

Ms. Rasika Satone and Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocates, i/by M.V.

Kini & Co., for the Petitioner.

Mrs. Neha S. Bhide, Government Pleader, with Mr. O.A.

Chandurkar, Additional Government Pleader and Ms. G.R.

Raghuwanshi, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.1-

State of Maharashtra.

Ms. Leena Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2-UOI.

Mr. Aditya N. Mehta, i/by Ms. Dipali Bagla, Advocates for

Respondent No.3.

Ms. Jaya Bagwe with Ms. Srushti Parab, Advocates for Respondent

No.4-MCZMA.

Mr. Swapnil Jadha, Officer from MSETCL is present in Court.

Mr. Ravindra Dighe, Officer from MSETCL is present in Court.

1/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. &

GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.

RESERVED ON : 22

nd

July, 2026

PRONOUNCED ON : 04

th

August, 2026

JUDGMENT : { Per Gautam A. Ankhad, J. }

1. By this Petition, the Petitioner seeks the permission of

this Court to undertake the construction and laying of a 132 KV

transmission line from the existing Dahanu Sub-Station to the

proposed Ambeserai Traction Sub-Station, Taluka Dahanu, District

Palghar. Since the execution of the project entails the cutting and

diversion of mangroves, the Petition has been filed seeking

permission of this Hon’ble Court in terms of the judgment dated

17

th

September, 2018 delivered by this Court in Bombay

Environmental Action Group & Anr. v. The State of Maharashtra

& Ors.

1

read with the order dated 2

nd

November, 2018 in Notice of

Motion No.278 of 2018 therein.

2. Dr. Sathe, the learned Advocate General appearing for

the Petitioner, submits that the proposed transmission line measures

approximately 13.06 kilometres. Certain portions of the alignment

1 Public Interest Litigation No. 87 of 2006

2/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

traverse mangrove forest land and private forest within Dahanu

Taluka, District Palghar. The transmission line is intended to

energize the proposed Ambeserai Traction Sub-station, which forms

an integral component of the Mumbai–Ahmedabad High Speed Rail

Corridor (Bullet Train Project) being implemented by the National

High Speed Rail Corporation Limited. The proposed infrastructure

will provide uninterrupted power supply to the high-speed rail

system. The project is of national importance and delay in its

execution would adversely affect the Bullet Train Project between

Mumbai and Ahmedabad.

3. The Petitioner submits that diversion of a total of

3.3561 hectares of forest land at Villages Mankod and Saravali,

Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar, under the provisions of the Forest

(Conservation) Act, 1980 [now the Van (Sanrakshan Evam

Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980] has been approved by the

competent authorities. The proposal details for felling of mangrove

and non-mangrove are as follows:

Particulars

Area

(Hectares)

Trees

Private Forest Area

(Dahanu Territorial

Forest Division)

1.3905

196

(Non-Mangrove)

3/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

Mangrove Forest

(Mangrove Division,

North Konkan)

1.9656

847

(Mangroves)

Total ….. 3.3561 1,043

The felling shall be restricted to the minimum number

necessary and that such felling shall be carried out only after the

grant of approval by this Hon’ble Court and strictly under the

supervision of the Forest Department.

4. The Petitioner states that all statutory and development

permissions required up to this stage have been duly obtained. This

includes the following:

(i) On 21

st

June, 2024, Respondent No.2 granted

Stage - I (In-Principal) approval under Section 2

of Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan)

Adhiniyam 1980;

(ii) On 1

st

October, 2024, Respondent No.2 granted

Stage-II (Final) Approval under Section 2 of Van

(Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam

1980;

(iii) On 23

rd

June, 2025, Respondent No.4 considered

the Petitioner’s proposal for Construction of

132 KV Dhanu-Ambesari Transmission Line and

granted CRZ Clearance.

4/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

5. As per the statutory approvals, the Petitioner is

obligated to carry out the proposed afforestation as follows:

(i) Compensatory Mangrove Plantation:

26,664 mangrove saplings shall be planted over 6.00

hectares, being three times the 1.9656 hectares of

mangrove forest diverted. This shall be done at village

Panchali (Boisar Forest Round) and villages Dehane and

Asangaon (Dahanu Forest Round) which are in close

proximity to the area of diversion. This work shall include

tidal chanelling, fencing, long term protection and is

expected to be completed by July, 2026.

(ii) Compensatory Afforestation for the Non-Mangrove Trees:

7,457 number of trees would be planted on 6.7122 hectares

of degraded forest land identified by the Forest

Department. This is twice the total land diverted and shall

be done at Survey No.260, Gut No.962, C. No.91, village

Katphal, taluka Sangola, district Solapur.

5/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

6. The Petitioner has deposited the following amounts for

the aforesaid purpose:

(a) 1,04,94,276/- in the Compensatory Afforestation₹

Fund Management and Planning Authority

(CAMPA) account;

(b) 1,62,880/- with the Deputy Conservator of₹

Forest, Dahanu towards tree cutting;

(c) 1,41,53,735/- with the Mangrove and Marine₹

Biodiversity Conservation Foundation of

Maharashtra towards the cost of compensatory

mangrove plantation, channelling, fencing and

protection for ten years;

(d) 56,72,668/- towards the cost of compensatory₹

afforestation over 6.7122 hectares of degraded

forest area, inclusive of the cost of ten years’

maintenance and fencing;

6/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(e) 48,21,608/- towards the Net Present Value of the₹

forest land diverted, computed in accordance with

the Government of India Order dated 6

th

January,

2022 and the applicable valuation norms; and

(f) 1,41,53,735/- to be deposited by the Petitioner₹

with the Mangrove and Marine Biodiversity

Conservation Foundation of Maharashtra towards

the costs of compensatory mangrove plantation,

channelling, fencing and protection for ten years.

7. It is in this background that the Petitioner has

approached this Court for prior permission to undertake

construction of the proposed transmission line and sub-station. The

leave of this Hon’ble Court is sought in accordance with the:

(a) Judgment and Order dated 17

th

September, 2018

passed by this Court in Public Interest Litigation

No.87 of 2006 read with the order dated 2

nd

November, 2018 in Notice of Motion No.278 of

2018 in PIL No.87 of 2006.

7/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(b) Condition No. xii and x imposed by Respondent

No. 2 in the Stage-I (in-principle) and final Stage-

II Forest Clearance granted under Section 2 of the

Van (Sanrakshan Evam Sanvardhan) Adhiniyam,

1980 dated 21

st

June, 2024 and 1

st

October, 2024

respectively.

(c) Specific Condition No. 3 imposed by Respondent

No.4 in its CRZ clearance dated 23

rd

June, 2025.

8. Ms. Bagwe, learned counsel for Respondent No.5

relies upon affidavit dated 11

th

February, 2026 filed by the

Divisional Forest Officer, Mangroves Division, North Konkan and

filed on behalf of the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of

Forest (Mangrove Cell). The affidavit confirms that the proposal

has been examined by the concerned statutory authorities and

appropriate orders be passed subject to full and strict compliance

with all conditions imposed by Respondent Nos.2 and 4.

9. Mr. Aditya Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf

of Respondent No.3-Bombay Environmental Action Group does not

8/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

dispute the public importance of the project, but raises concerns

regarding environmental impact of the proposed compensatory

measures. The learned counsel submits that in the present case, the

area identified for compensatory afforestation for non-mangrove

trees is situated at Solapur which is approximately 500 kms. from

the project site. The far away plantation cannot compensate for the

ecological loss suffered by the affected areas in Dahanu-Palghar

region. This non-mangrove afforestation ought to be undertaken

closer to the project site considering that it impacts 1.3905 hectares

of forest. Reliance is placed upon the order dated 15

th

April, 2024

passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in M.C. Mehta Vs.

Union of India

2

and the order dated 16

th

June, 2026 in Court on its

Own Motion Vs. Principal Secretary, Ministry of Environment,

Government of Maharashtra

3

passed by the Nagpur Bench of the

Bombay High Court questioning rationale of the compensatory

afforestation at distant locations. It is further submitted that this

Court should ensure strict implementation of the conditions

imposed in the earlier orders and continue judicial supervision for

its compliance.

2 Writ Petition (Civil) No.4677 of 1985 – Order dated 15

th

April, 2024.

3 Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation No.10 of 2026

9/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

10. From the perusal of the aforesaid record, we find that

the transmission line and the Ambeserai Traction Sub-Station is

integral to the Mumbai–Ahmedabad High Speed Rail Corridor, a

project of national importance. The proposal for diversion of

mangroves and felling of trees has been scrutinised and approved

by the Respondent-Authorities, after the determination by the

expert bodies. We do not intend to interfere with the assessment of

the expert bodies. The Petitioner and its agencies who will execute

the project have agreed to comply with all the conditions in the said

approvals. It is only on the basis of the express ecological

commitments made and the categorical assurances furnished by the

Petitioner and by Respondent Nos.1 and 5, that both the

compensatory mangrove plantation and the compensatory

afforestation of non-mangrove trees shall be carried out, protected

and duly maintained, that we are inclined to grant the reliefs sought

in this Petition. The Petitioner and Respondent Nos.1 and 5 jointly

submit that they are willing to comply with any additional condition

that this Hon’ble Court may deem appropriate to ensure that the re-

plantation of mangroves and the compensatory afforestation

achieve the intended growth and survival.

10/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

11. Thus, in our view, the Petitioner is entitled to leave as

sought for in paragraph no.83(viii) of the judgment in Bombay

Environmental Action Group, on the following conditions:-

(a) Felling shall be confined to the 847 mangrove

trees and 196 non-mangrove trees aforesaid and

shall be carried out under the strict supervision of

the Forest Department;

(b) The compensatory mangrove plantation of 26,664

mangrove plants over 6.00 hectares at villages

Panchali, Dehane and Asangaon, together with

channelling for the free ingress and egress of tidal

sea water, chain-link fencing and all protective

measures, shall be carried out simultaneously

with, or prior to, the felling of the mangroves, and

shall in any event be completed by November,

2026, and shall thereafter be maintained and

protected for a period of ten years by the

Mangrove Division, North Konkan, at the cost of

the Petitioner;

11/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(c) Compensatory afforestation of 7,457 trees over

6.7122 hectares of degraded forest land at Village

Katphal, Taluka Sangola, District Solapur, shall be

undertaken by the Forest Department of

Respondent No.1 at the cost of the Petitioner, and

shall be maintained, fenced and protected for a

period of ten years at the cost of the Petitioner.

(d) All information relating to the felling, the

compensatory mangrove plantation and the

compensatory afforestation of non-mangrove trees

including the plantation sites, the number of

saplings planted, and the survival and mortality

rates thereof shall be published and periodically

updated on the website created for monitoring the

compensatory plantation of mangroves and to be

created for non-mangrove trees, so as to ensure

transparency and public awareness;

(e) The maximum area, wherever feasible, shall be

restored upon completion of the project, at the

project cost;

12/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(f) The conditions set out in paragraph 40(IV) of

Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development

Authority v. Union of India, through the

Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate

Change & Ors.

4

and paragraph 22 of

Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation v. Union

of India & Ors.

5

shall also apply, to the extent

relevant, to the present project;

(g) In the event of failure to comply with any of the

above conditions, the Petitioner, as the User

Agency, shall be liable to action and prosecution

in accordance with the rules and guidelines issued

under the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan)

Adhiniyam, 1980.

h) The mangroves which have been planted as a part of

any compensatory afforestation scheme approved

or directed by this Court in any other matter, shall

not be felled by the Respondents.

4Writ Petition No.3727 of 2025 – Order dated 9

th

September 2025.

5Writ Petition No.3790 of 2025 – Judgment dated 12

th

December 2025.

13/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

12. We find merit in the concern expressed by Respondent

No.3 on the issue of compensatory afforestation of non-mangrove

trees proposed at Solapur. Compensatory afforestation is not

intended to be a mere numerical replacement of trees felled for a

project. Its purpose is ecological restoration. The same can be

meaningful only if restoration is attempted in the same ecological

region or, where that is demonstrably impossible, in the nearest

adjoining area. Plantation undertaken hundreds of kilometres away

may satisfy a statistical requirement, but fails to restore the

environmental benefits of the affected locality. This principle has

been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta’s

case (supra) and by this Court in Writ Petition No.3727 of 2025

and Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation No. 10 of 2026 (supra)

while considering compensatory plantation at distant locations. The

Court recorded that plantation undertaken at distant locations

cannot compensate the residents who lose the environmental

benefits of mature trees in the affected locality. Ordinarily,

compensatory afforestation for non-mangrove trees should be

undertaken in the vicinity of the project area itself. Nevertheless,

having regard to the fact that the proposal has already been

approved by the competent authorities, as also urged by the learned

14/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

Advocate General, we are granting permission for the non-

mangrove afforestation at Solapur only as an exceptional measure.

This shall not be treated as a precedent or extended to any other

project.

13. However, there is another aspect of the matter which

causes us far greater concern. While considering similar

applications for cutting of mangroves and trees for infrastructure

projects in Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority

v. Union of India

6

, this Court issued comprehensive directions,

inter alia, for creation of dedicated public portals, websites,

publication of project-specific information, identification of land

banks for compensatory afforestation etc. They constituted binding

judicial directions designed to ensure that compensatory

afforestation does not remain confined to files and affidavits, but is

translated into measurable ecological restoration capable of

continuous scrutiny. The relevant portions of the order are quoted:

“27. During the course of the hearing, keeping in mind

our concern regarding the implementation and

transparency of afforestation efforts, we directed

the authorities to create a dedicated website,

accessible to one and all. A website containing

details of the project, amounts deposited,

6 Writ Petition No.3727 of 2025 – Order dated 9

th

September 2025.

15/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

mangroves/trees affected, including details of

species of trees to be felled and compensatory

afforestation efforts undertaken i.e.

trees/mangroves where planted, including the

numbers/species, their survival details, etc.

Details of Court order along with conditions to be

complied with; status of compliance done, along

with updated photographs, periodically, etc. also

to be uploaded on this website. We had also

expressed our serious concern that the procedure

for inviting objections with regard to the

destruction/affecting of mangroves was opaque

and hence required greater transparency. The

learned Addl. G.P, on instructions, assured us

that such a dedicated website would be created

within four weeks from the date of the order,

incorporating all requisite details.

38. We have also taken note that compensatory

afforestation is being carried out at locations far

remote from the sites where trees are felled,

rather than in close proximity to the affected

areas, which are environmentally impacted by

such felling. The same requires serious

consideration. The Apex Court, in M.C. Mehta v.

Union of India, has observed in paragraph 3 as

under:

“3. We are informed across the Bar by

Mr. S.W.A. Qadri, the learned senior

counsel for the applicant that the site

for compensatory afforestation is

approximately at a distance of 10

kilometers from the site of the

project. The question is whether there

can be, in true sense, compensatory

afforestation by providing a site

approximately at a distance of 10

kilometers away from the site of the

project.”

39. This observation underscores the necessity of

ensuring that afforestation is not only undertaken

16/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

but is done in a manner that meaningfully restores

ecological balance in the very regions that suffer

degradation, rather than in distant areas where

the environmental impact is negligible. We also

are of the opinion that it is imperative to create

land banks i.e. areas readily available where

afforestation can undertaken in future. Further,

the progress of afforestation must be closely

monitored, including the mortality rate of planted

saplings. Where trees or mangroves are

translocated, their survival and growth shall also

be systematically monitored and reported, so that

the compensatory measures are not illusory but

effective in practice.

40. In view of the above discussion and findings, the

Petition is disposed of with the following

directions: I. The Petitioner is permitted to

commence and execute the proposed construction

of the Kasheli Depot with EHV towers and

transmission lines for Mumbai Metro Line– 5,

including the cutting of 26 mangroves, subject to

strict compliance with all conditions imposed by

the concerned statutory authorities. II. The

plantation of 370–400 mangrove saplings, as

undertaken by the authorities, shall be completed

by 30th September 2025 in Survey No. 62 at

Village Surai. Trees also to be planted at Dhule.

III. The cost of fencing of the plantation area

referred to in Clause II shall be borne by the

concerned Planning Authority.

IV. In addition to the aforesaid project-specific

directions, the following shall operate as

general conditions applicable to this and all

future permissions concerning cutting or

diversion of mangroves/trees:

(a) Monies deposited by the project

proponent shall be utilised exclusively

for afforestation purposes, the purpose

for which it is deposited i.e. for

plantation of trees/mangroves or both.

17/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(b) The authorities shall, within six weeks,

launch a dedicated public website/portal

to host project-specific information, past

and present, pertaining to projects of the

last ten years, wherein permissions were

granted for cutting of trees or

mangroves, together with the approvals

and conditions imposed on the project

proponents. The web portal to also

contain details such as (i) the name,

location, and purpose of the project; (ii)

all approvals granted; (iii) the number

and location of mangroves/trees

affected; (iv) details of compensatory

plantation, i.e. species, number, and

location; (v) the status of afforestation,

supported by geotagged and time-

stamped photographs duly certified by

the Nodal Officer; (vi) details of

compliance, together with annual

verification reports; and (vii) survival of

trees/mangroves so planted i.e.

mortality, and, if the same do not

survive, the re-plantation done.

(c) The said portal shall be updated once

every four months giving the aforesaid

particulars.

(d) Details of the land bank created for

afforestation shall also be uploaded on

the portal within eight weeks. Such land

shall be duly fenced, kept free from

encroachment, mutated in favour of the

Forest Department, and handed over to

it. Land identified as suitable for

mangrove plantations shall likewise be

earmarked as land banks and reflected

on the website. Regular monitoring shall

be undertaken to ensure that no

encroachment takes place on the land

banks created for afforestation.

18/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(e) Where diversion exceeds one hectare,

the User Agency must identify

equivalent non-forest land for

compensatory afforestation. Such land

must neither be under the control of the

Forest Department nor notified as forest

under any law. It shall be verified and

certified by the Deputy Conservator of

Forests (Territorial) as suitable for

afforestation. Upon such identification,

the User Agency must acquire the land,

fence it, ensure mutation of land records

in favour of the Forest Department, and

hand over possession to the Forest

Department, in accordance with Rule 13

of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam

Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980 and

Chapter II of the Compensatory

Afforestation Guidelines.

(f) Where diversion is less than one

hectare, the User Agency shall bear the

cost of plantation of ten times the

number of trees proposed to be cut. In

such cases, compensatory mangrove

afforestation shall be undertaken on

degraded mangrove land, within the

same district, following the principle of

“land-for-land” and “tree-for-tree”, as

provided in Chapter 2, Guideline 2.1. In

cases of large-scale mangrove loss,

afforestation shall be planned in

alternate degraded mangrove areas

within the same district or region.

(g) Environmental approvals to be obtained

and granted for the project as a whole,

and not in a piecemeal manner, so that

the total number of trees/mangroves

likely to be affected is placed before the

authorities and the Court. All such

approvals shall be uploaded on the

website as and when obtained/granted.

19/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(h) In case of any subsequent modifications,

the project proponent must provide due

justification and undertake a fresh

Environmental Impact Assessment,

together with a revised mangrove

conservation plan covering the project

in its entirety.

(i) The Forest Department/Mangrove Cell

shall identify sites for compensatory

afforestation in close proximity to the

affected area, in line with the

observation of the Apex Court in MC

Mehta v. Union of India (supra).

(j) No felling shall commence until

afforestation measures are initiated,

bearing in mind the considerable time

required for trees and mangroves to

attain maturity.

(k) The Forest Department/Mangrove Cell

shall give seven days’ advance

intimation to the Respondent No. 6

(Bombay Environmental Action Group)

before carrying out afforestation, to

enable deputation of a representative to

observe the plantation process.

(l) The following documents shall be made

freely accessible to the public on the

Mangrove Cell website without login or

registration: project proposals,

clearances, EIA/EMP reports, minutes

of meetings, inspection reports, CZMP

maps, NoCs, approvals, conservation

and afforestation plans, geo-tagged

plantation details, photographs, and

compliance/status reports, etc.

(m) All mangrove patches within and around

the project site shall be geo-tagged and

GIS-mapped.

20/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(n) Re-plantation shall strictly be in

compliance with the provisions of the

1980 Act and the Rules of 2023 framed

thereunder.”

14. We find that even after almost a year, Respondent No.1

has not complied with the directions relating to creation of land

banks, publication of the requisite information on the public portal

and establishment of a transparent mechanism for monitoring

compensatory afforestation of non-mangrove trees. This

continuing default and administrative apathy displayed by the

concerned authorities cannot be accepted. Unless effective

monitoring mechanisms, transparent disclosure and properly

identified land banks are put in place, compensatory afforestation

would remain a theoretical exercise rather than an ecological

restoration. Such a situation cannot be permitted to continue. We

accordingly direct the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra,

the Principal Secretary (Forests), the Principal Chief Conservator of

Forests and the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

(Mangrove Cell) to ensure full compliance and implementation of

the directions contained in the judgments dated 9

th

September 2025

within a period of four weeks from today. The Principal Secretary

21/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

(Forests) and/or the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests shall file

compliance affidavits specifically stating:

(i) creation of land banks district-wise;

(ii) availability of land suitable for non-mangrove

restoration;

(iii) status of plantation and fencing;

(iv) operational status of the public portal;

(v) project-wise compliance of the permissions

granted by this Court till date shall be uploaded on

the portal;

(vi) mechanism adopted for monitoring survival

percentages; and

(vii) names of the officers responsible for maintenance

of the portal.

The affidavit shall not be vague or omnibus but shall disclose

project-specific compliance.

15. We make it clear that the present permission, insofar as

it permits compensatory afforestation for non-mangrove trees at a

distant location, is granted as an exceptional case and having regard

to the national importance of the project. In future, this Court shall

not grant permissions where compensatory afforestation is proposed

at locations far remote from the area affected until Respondent No.1

complies with the directions issued by the Court issued almost a

year ago.

22/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

16. To ensure that the plantation, maintenance, protection

and afforestation of the mangroves and non-mangrove trees is

effectively implemented, the Petitioner shall file an Interim

Application on a bi-annually basis, with comprehensive status/audit

reports supported by affidavits signed by the Petitioner (through its

Managing Director), by Respondent No.5 (through the Additional

Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Mangrove Cell), and by the

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Nagpur. Such Interim

Application shall be filed twice every year on or before 12

th

January and 12

th

July for the next ten years and shall be

automatically listed on the third Friday of January and third Friday

of July respectively, for the purposes of compliance and review.

Failure to file such reports or Interim Application shall be treated as

contempt of this Court. Subject to the outcome of the Applications,

this Court may issue such further directions as required. It is also on

account of the apathy displayed by the State Government as is

noted in the order passed by this Court on 9

th

September, 2025 that

we are modifying the condition of listing the Interim Applications

which contained the comprehensive status/audit report to be listed,

bi-annul basis for monitoring and for compliance.

23/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

17. In view of the above, Writ Petition No.11256 of 2025

is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads as under:

“(a) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant

permission to the Petitioner i.e. Maharashtra

State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd.

(MSETCL) for diversion of 3.3561 ha. of forest

land out of which 1.9656 ha. of mangrove forest

land in favour of the MSETCL for cutting of 847

mangroves trees within the construction zone for

the project forming part of village Mankode,

Saravali, Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar for use

of non-forest purpose under the Forest

(Conservation) Act, 1980 for the forest land

involved towards construction of 132 KV EHV

Transmission Line from 132 KV Dahanu

Substation to the proposed 132 KV Ambesarai

Traction Substation (TSS) as part of the Mumbai-

Ahmedabad High-Speed Rail Project in the State

of Maharashtra.”

18. Liberty to apply.

[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ]

24/24

WP-11256-2025-Judgment.odt Dixit

SNEHA

ABHAY

DIXIT

Digitally

signed by

SNEHA

ABHAY DIXIT

Date:

2026.08.04

11:29:11

+0530