Green tribunal stops CIDCO from leasing CRZ plot in Nerul

NGT’s direction was in response to two applications made to the tribunal in 2022. “CIDCO consistently maintained that the plots did not fall in the CRZ 1 area but NGT saw through their tactics and has come up with a remarkable judgement, which will go a long way in safeguarding the coastal line,” said Rekha Sankhala, one of the petitioners

NAVI MUMBAI: In a major setback to CIDCO’s plans to lease out over 25,000 square metres of land area adjacent to the Nerul jetty, the Pune-based National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday directed it not to sell, transfer or grant any leasehold rights on the land demarcated as Plot No 2 A in Sectors 54, 56 and 58 of Nerul West. The government body was, instead, ordered to go by the draft development plan of the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and utilise the area as a social facility and garden.

HT Image

NGT’s direction was in response to two applications made to the tribunal in 2022. “CIDCO consistently maintained that the plots did not fall in the CRZ 1 area but NGT saw through their tactics and has come up with a remarkable judgement, which will go a long way in safeguarding the coastal line,” said Rekha Sankhala, one of the petitioners. Environmental activists are buoyed by the order and hope it will stop CIDCO from selling similar plots in Kharghar and Ulwe.

To ascertain whether the plots fell in the CRZ 1, II and III areas, the tribunal relied upon the map by the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management. “Through this, it determined that the mangrove area, along with its buffer zone of 50 metres, is ecologically sensitive and construction activities are not permitted there,” said Sankhala.

CIDCO’s assertions that construction could be permitted due to the existence of a road was also negated by the tribunal. “The road was termed to be a mere strip of land which doesn’t fit the definition of a road,” said petitioner Anupam Verma. “CIDCO’s ploy of citing unused FSI by clubbing both CRZ and non-CRZ area was also debunked, since no construction is permissible in CRZ-II and CRZ-1A areas. The question of utilising the FSI of non-permissible areas for construction in adjoining areas does not arise.”

Even though CIDCO has been asked to follow NMMC’s development plan, its officials are considering further legal options. “Our legal team is going through the order and will decide on the further course of action,” said an official.