BOMBAY ENVIRONMENT ACTION GROUP Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1st Petitioner herein is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and is interested in the protection of environment in various parts of the country and particularly in the State of Maharashtra. It has taken steps from time to time for that purpose including filing proceedings in this High Court as well as in the Supreme Court. The 2nd Petitioner is a member of the 1st Petitioner. The present petition is concerning the protection of environment in the Mahabaleshwar and Panchgani twin hill stations.

(2.) (i) The 1st Respondent to this petition is the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Urban Development Department as well as the Secretary, Revenue & Forests Department. Respondent No.10 is the Town Planning and Valuation Department of the State Government through its various officers. The 2nd and the 3rd Respondents are Mahabaleshwar and Panchgani Municipal Council respectively, both governed under the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayat and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (also referred as Maharashtra Municipalities Act). The 4th Respondent is the Collector of Satara. The 5th Respondent is Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests.

(3.) The 1st Petitioner herein had filed one writ petition earlier bearing Writ Petition No.2754 of 1997, which came to be disposed of by a judgment and order dated 18th November 1998 passed by a Division Bench presided over by the then Chief Justice M.B. Shah and Radhakrishnan J. Various directions for protection of the environmental in Mahabaleshwar and Panchgani were issued while disposing of that writ petition. The grievance in that petition was that large scale illegal construction activities and deforestation was going on in Mahabaleshwar-Panchgani area resulting in widespread environment and ecological problems. The Regional Plan for that area for the years 1984-2001 was already in vogue and their provisions were claimed to have been violated as also those of the Building Bye-laws and the Development Control Rules.