Top Banner

of 215


Feb 14, 2017





    Dossier Containing Final Order and Other Relevant Documents

    16th January 2011

    Annexures to Report

  • /*i5

    A-!e/o a%n'Ag.M


    ilq, 8r/ &lo*, Vty-y ffiade, @": &*a %r,rt%n*J, 0l/4nt, at{,/*,,/t.i - 400 0/8, pf-ta.

    {rl. , +9/-22-2492 4477 / ELLS 4488 6 &*. +9/-2fl-24g4 8670 uff-roa,l,


    Mr. Bharat Bhushan

    The Director,

    Ministry of Environment & Forests

    Paryavaran Bhavan,

    CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,

    New Delhi 110 003


    Ref: t





    ' l f rr rJ ')/ i " ' " 1 ' 1 " - ' ' - n

    (rr'T L -1,.)t" -,-/ \t!-

    _.nn- . \\ j

    , " : } \ \s( / t \ ./ r * - {/ \ \y ' { \ \/ i)

    Your show cause notice No.19-94/ 2010-IA-III dated 12ft November.2010

    received by us on 15ft November,2AlA.

    My response on behalf of ADARSH Co-operative Housing Limited dated

    24ft November, 201,0.

    My letter dated 29th November, 2010 requesting for inspection of letters/

    Documents/meefings referred to in your show cause notice dated

    12d'November, 201,0.

    Letter bearing ref. No.19-94/2010-IA-III dated 29rt November,20L0

    granting extension of time (received by me on 6ft December ,2010).My response dated 6ft December,2}lA interalia requesting for time, inspection

    and seven days clear notice of any hearing.

  • cqP.,ffi)Z"M Vr'rrt a%,*tdh"r""n

    1) I am concerned for my client, ADARSH Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., situate at CTS

    No.652, Block-6, Colaba Division, Capt.Prakash Pathe Marg, Colaba, Mumbai 400 005.

    2) My client has instructed me to forward its response/reply to your Show Cause Notice

    bearing No. 19-94 /201A-IA-III dated 12u' November, 2010. The said response is enclosed

    herewith in the form of detailed submissions.

    3) I, on behalf of my client request you to consider the aforesaid submissions and not take

    the action contemplated by your show cause notice dated 12ft November, 2010.

    4) In the event of your not being satisfied with the submissions of my client, as earlier

    intimated to you, my ciient desires to have a right of hearing before the Ministry of

    Environment and Forests. {

    5) Further to inform you that this reply will be filed in the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in

    Writ Petition No. 2407 /2010 filed by my client, for Hon'ble Court's assistance.



    Encl: As above

    Thanking you,

  • ec""ffi 9. o/t"-*l;**


    (Through Member Secretary, (MCZMA)

    New Administrative Building, 15th Floor,

    Environment Department, Manfralaya,

    Mumbai - 400032

    Vr'rrt Q%"tt

  • O

    AD - q,St{ CO-OffiEA, - rr'?tr ffOuS mrg s oc IEW LCI(D

    Re g n. trto tut U *t /WA ft tS g /tC / t q a U z 0 0 4 / 2 0 0 s /,{f"AK 0 4

    CTS gl-o. 652, cB[oc{'/l, Co[a6a rDivisian, Captain cPra{asfi 7etfre foLarg

    fldjacent to Bacfr6a1(Bus (Depot, Co[a6a, *lum6ai - 400 005

    te fefaa 0 2 2 - 2 2 1 6 6 3 3 7, lE -m ai t a fars fi s o cic t! @ re 4Lf frn ai [. c o m





    ADARSH craves leave to respond to the Show Cause Notice dated L2th November,

    20L0 bearing No. 19-94/2010-IA-III (hereinafter referred to as the "Show Cause

    Notice" or "SCN" for short) as under:

    At the outset ADARSH submits that, after receipt of the show cause notice,

    ADRASH had sought inspection of the documents on 29ft November 2010. The said

    letter has not been responded to nor any time has been fixed for inspection of the

    documents. The preliminary reply as well as this reply is without prejudice to

    ADARSH's submission that, failure to give inspection is contrary to the principles of

    natural justice and vitiates the entire ""4;it.


    fir> fl

  • o

    A) FACTS:

    1. The Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966, particularly Section 40 read with

    section 20 and 38 thereof empowers the State Government to dispose of grant

    andf or lease any land or properfy belonging to the Government on such terms

    and conditions as it deems fit. In exercise of the said power, the Government of

    Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as the GOM) framed a policy for such

    disposalllease of land to a Cooperative Society, which is in force for last more

    than 20 years. The said policy was modified on 9ft ]uly, 1999 and duly notified in

    the name of the Governor of Maharashtra by the Revenue and Forests

    Department, GOM. Annexed hereto and marked as Annexure-I is a copy of the

    said policy as modified on 9ttt JuLy, 1999 by Government Resolution

    No.LCSL095/Sr.No.37 /95/51., case No.37 /9551, dated 9ft July, 1999 (hereinafter

    referred to as the 99 G.R.).

    2. ADARSH which iE a "housing society" within the section oI 2(1,6) of the

    Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 applied lastly by its application

    dated 2'd June, 2000 to the GOM for allotment of land for the purpose of

    construction of a residential building for the benefit of its members, being

    eligible under the 99 G.R.

    3. By Letter of Intent bearing No.LBR-25-2000/ case No.912/Gl dated 18ft January,

    2003; GOM expressed its desire to allot the plot of land admeasuring3758.22 sq.

    meters at Backbay Reclamatioru Block No.VI, Plot No.87 to ADARSH (ADARSH

    land) for a consideration of Rs. 12 crores approximately. Annexed hereto and

    marked as Annexure'Il is a copy of the said Letter of Intent.


  • o




    The MOEF in exercise of its power purportedly conferred by clause (D) of sub-

    rule 3 of rule 5 of the Environmental (Protection) Rules 1986 imposed

    restrictions/prohibitions and has duly notified the same under section 3(1) an4

    Section 3(Z) (v) of the Environmental Protection Act,1986. The MOEF has also

    framed Coastal Area Classification and Development Regulations which form a

    part of such Notification. Annexed hereto and marked as Annexure-Ill, IV and

    V are the copies of notification dated L9ft February,1991,9ft ]uly, 199T and 22^a

    April, 2003 issued by the Minisfry of Environment and Forests (MOEF),

    (hereinafter referred to as the 199-1, nottfication, the1997 notification and the 2003

    notification respectively).

    The 1991 notification classifies activities capable of being carried out in the

    Coastal Regulation Zone into two categories (1) Prohibited activities and (ii)

    Permissible activities. A1l activities which are not expressly listed as prohibited

    activities are to be taken as permissible activities within the meaning of the

    notification. Construction of residential building irrespective of the FSI

    consumed and the height thereof is a permissible activity within the meaning of

    Clause 3 of the 1991 notification.

    6. If construction of residential building were to be freated as an " actlity" for the

    purPose of 1991notificatiory the construction of the building of ADARSH wouid

    fall in para 3(2)(iv) which reads as under:-

    "3. Regulation of Permissible Actioities:

    All other actiuities except those prohibited in para lI aboae wilt be regulateil as



  • , r : n )f t::"'

    | /


    Q) The folloraing actiuities znill require enuironmental clearance from the

    Ministry of Enaironment and Forests, Gaaernment of Inilia, namely:-

    izt) 'all other activities utith inaestment exceeding Rs.S crores."

    Thus as per the 1991 notification such activity would require environmental

    clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India.

    7. By the 1997 notrtication, the MOEF modified/amended the L991 notification.

    Paras 3(iv) of the 1997 notification reads as under:

    3. All other actiuities except those prohibited in para II aboae utill be regulated

    as under:-

    @ The following actiuities rnill require environmental clearance from the

    Ministry of Enaironment t Forests, Government of lndia, namely:- __:,ia) "aII other activities with inaestment exceeding Rs.fiae crores except those

    llactitsities which are to be regulated by the concerned authorities at State&lnion

    { __*tereitory leael in accordance with the proztisions of paragraph 6, sub paragraph

    i, !

    Q) of Annucure I of the notification. *.':,"'n

    8. Thus, the 1997 notification deviated fundamentally in respect of Environmental

    Clearances for activities with investment exceeding Rs.5 crores. The 1997

    notification provided for a clearance by the State Authorify (in the State) for

    activities covered by paragraph 3(2) (iv) of the 1997 notification. Thus, assuming

    that construction of residential building would be an "activity" within the

    meaning of paragraph 3(2)(iv) of the 1991, and the 1997 Notification, the same

    by virtue of 1997 notification would not require clearance from MOEF.

    ' r ( ) '

  • o

    9. The Ministry of Environment and Forests, (hereinafter referred to as MOEF)

    approved with certain modification the Maharashtra State Coastal Zone

    Management Plan (herein#ter referred to as the CZM) on 27f. September,1996.

    Thereafter, it approved the revised CZM on 19ft January, 2000. As per this

    approved plan the plot of ADARSH falls in the category II (CRZ-II). This is an

    accepted a