Four residents of housing societies near the Worli end of the sea link have contended before the Bombay high court that the connectors do not have environmental clearance and they should be declared unauthorised.
Are the Worli dairy and Pratiksha building connectors of the Bandra-Worli sea link illegal? The Bombay high court (HC) will decide soon.
Four residents of housing societies near the Worli end of the sea link have contended before the HC that the connectors do not have environmental clearance and they should be declared unauthorised. Citing hazards caused by the connectors, Dileep Nevatia and his three co-petitioners have written that they made an inquiry under the Right to Information Act and found that an affidavit submitted by the Union ministry of environment and forests (MOEF) to the court in December 2005 regarding the connectors was false.
The petitioners have pointed out that the HC in 2005 dismissed a similar petition after taking on record the MOEF’s affidavit, which stated that the ministry had granted clearances to the connectors. The Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC) had sought permission from the MOEF to extend the sea link by 1.6 km near the Worli dairy in March 2003.
The petitioners have stated that between August and December 2009, RTI inquiries with the MOEF, chief conservator of forests and the MSRDC revealed that “there is no reference made by the MSRDC or clearance given by the MOEF for the realignment of the sea link and constitution of the connectors in front of Pratiksha building”.
They have stated that when Nevatia visited the MOEF’s western region office in Bhopal for inspecting the documents, he learnt that the central public information officer had not received any clearance letter from the MOEF in respect of the connector in front of the building. The petition says that the officer “confided” in Nevatia, saying the connectors are a violation of the Coastal Regulation Zone notification of 1991.
Government pleader DA Nalavade said the HC has given the respondents three weeks to file their reply. A senior MSRDC officer said: “The allegations made in the petition are not correct.”
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}