Bombay HC halts construction by Hiranandani Developers in Powai

Social activists fighting land grab by builders have a reason to cheer. The Bombay High Court has restrained Mumbai-based Hiranandani Developers from carrying out further construction at a township it is developing in suburban Powai until it provides flats for the economically weaker sections of society. The court also put on hold the sale of the flats till further orders.

Court allows land transfer to Navi Mumbai airport

All decks have been cleared for the proposed international airport at Navi Mumbai. The Bombay High Court on February 1 allowed the City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) to hand over the 1,830 ha, including the 63.5 ha embroiled in ownership dispute, to the Airport Authority of India. The court said the documentary evidence presented before it indicated that the contested land had been in possession of CIDCO for several years.

Jaitapur nuclear protests: activist leader gets externment notice

Tension prevails in Jaitapur and nearby villages in the backdrop of the call for Jail Bharo protest on January 24, given by Janhit Seva Samiti. The state government is adopting unprecedented measures to curb the protest. Social activist and anti-nuclear leader Vaishali Patil has been slapped with a notice for externment from Ratnagiri under the Mumbai Police Act 1951. The Nate police, in Ratnagiri district, issued the notice citing two cases pending in the court against her and ordered Vaishali Patil to appear before the sub-divisional officer of Ratnagiri. 

Bombay HC halts work at Mulund-Thane SEZ

The Bombay High Court has put a spanner in the land reclamation work currently on at the Mulund-Thane Special Economic Zone (SEZ) project site in the ecologically sensitive coastal area in northeastern Mumbai. It has asked the project proponent, Zeus Infrastructure, to stop dumping solid waste in the area immediately. The company was using construction debris and municipal garbage to reclaim land.

Lavasa exposed

Nagpur village moves court against Bhopal's toxic waste incineration

Residents of village Ruikhairi near Nagpur have moved court against the proposal to burn the toxic waste from the Union carbide factory in Bhopal  at the waste facility of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) near their homes.

High Court forces Maharashtra to take credible action against Lavasa

After being pulled up by the Bombay High Court, the Maharashtra government  assured the court on October 20 that “credible action” will be taken against Lavasa Corporation Limited (LCL) for violating environmental laws. The company is developing Lavasa city near Pune, which is India’s first planned hill city post Independence. The state government told the court that action will be taken within two weeks, following which, the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) could reconsider its earlier order.

Court orders fresh public hearing for Lanco power plant in Wardha

In a landmark judgement, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court ordered a fresh public hearing for the 1,320 MW coal-fired power plant proposed in Mandwa in Maharashtra's Wardha district. The court, however, refused to stay the environment clearance granted to the project developer, Lanco Infratech Limited, in February 2011.

Devise action plan to tackle malnutrition deaths: Bombay HC

Taking suo moto cognisance of the deaths of infants due to malnutrition in Nashik district of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court has asked the government to design an action plan to tackle the situation.

PepsiCo to shell out more for water in Maharashtra

On September 12, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by PepsiCo India, questioning increased water charges with retrospective effect from 2001. They must now clear Rs 70 lakh as arrears in water bills. A 2009, the Bombay High Court directive had upheld the Maharashtra government'ss decision to charge industries which use water as a raw material (soft drinks, mineral water) a higher rate (ten times the existing) with effect from September 2001. Against this decision, PepsiCo filed the appeal in the Supreme Court.