The Bombay High Court has intervened once again in the ongoing dispute regarding the felling of trees for the widening of roads in Dahanu, Palghar district, by staying the cutting of 759 trees.
Court Questions Authority of Dahanu Municipal Corporation Officials
A bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Arif Doctor questioned the Dahanu Municipal Corporation (DMC) over the authority of local officials involved in the decision-making process.
An order for felling of trees was passed by chief officer (CO) of the DMC on May 23, 2025, which permitted the felling of 759 trees as part of the road expansion project.
Petitioner Challenges CO’s Authority Under Tree Protection Law
A petition was filed by a local-resident, Santosh Jaiswal, challenging this decision. The plea raised an objection, claiming that the CO , acting alone, has overstepped his powers under the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Tree Protection and Preservation Act, 1975 (Tree Act).
According to the petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Swapnil Shanbhag and Jinal Sanghvi, the CO cannot unilaterally exercise the powers of a Tree Authority. “Under Section 3 of the Tree Act, the Tree Authority must consist of a Chairman and a body of no less than five and no more than fifteen members. The Chief Officer can only act as the Chairman, but not as the entire authority,” plea contended.
Moreover, the Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Authority (DTEPA), July 22, approved the CO’s tree felling order.
The petitioner contended this was in violation of the Tree Act.
Court Questions DTEPA’s Jurisdiction
Advocate Nitin Gangal, representing DTEPA and DMC, contended that the DTEPA’s approval was based on its environmental protection mandate.
However, the court questioned whether the DTEPA had the legal jurisdiction to approve decisions made under the Tree Act. Justice Kulkarni observed, “The DTEPA appears to have exercised jurisdiction that was not expressly conferred on it by law.”
This is the second round of litigation with regard to the project. Earlier in February 2025, the High Court had stayed the felling of 777 trees in a similar case, following a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Chauhan Foundation, a local trust. The PIL, through advocate Arjun Kadam, had argued that the permission granted to fell trees violated the provisions of the Tree Act.
Pursuant to stay granted in the PIL, the municipal council withdrew the permission to fell trees and then issued fresh permission.
Court Directs Affidavits from DMC and DTEPA
That fresh permission was challenged again by Jaiswal, which was stayed by the HC. The bench has directed the DMC and DTEPA to file affidavits addressing the legal issues raised. “Till the adjourned date of hearing, we order that the felling of trees shall be stayed,” the court ruled.
.jpg)
