JOIN THE LCW
COMMUNITY

Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, quarterly analytics report, curated expert talks, merchandise and much more. Support our work!

Sign up today

Aarey Conflict Ends, Metro Car Shed to be Shifted to Kanjurmarg

Reported by

Prerna Chaurashe

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Published on

September 19, 2016

May 17, 2022

Edited on

September 19, 2016

State

Maharashtra

Sector

Infrastructure

People Affected by Conflict

10000

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

30

ha

Starting Year

2011

Location of Conflict

Aarey Colony

Mumbai

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Urban Development (Other than Smart Cities)

Land Conflict Summary

After a long battle fought by environmental activists and local poeple to save what is known as Mumbai's 'green lung', the conflict over the Metro car shed in Aarey Colony is finally over. On October 11, 2020, Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray declared that the car shed, which was the bone of contention in the almost decadelong conflict, would be shifted out of Aarey forests and would now be built on government land in Kanjurmarg in central Mumbai. The chief minister also directed the police to withdraw all cases filed against Aarey protestors. The move to relocate the car shed comes after a landmark decision of the Maharashtra government in September to reserve 600 acres of land in Aarey as reserved forest. According to Thackeray, the decision will protect the rights of the tribal community living within the forest. Amitra Bhattacharjee from the Aarey Conservation Group said that the declaration was the first step towards conservation of Aarey. However, the proposed reserved forest area did not include the land on which the car shed was being built. Aarey Colony is home to a large number of tribespeople, who have lived in the area for generations and run cowsheds that supply milk to a governmentrun dairy. They have been opposing the metro car shed since it was proposed in 2011. They claimed that construction activity had destroyed a portion of wetlands in the area, which is crucial for streams to flow. Aarey is the catchment area of the Mithi river. Environmental experts too warned that any construction in the area could cause flooding. In October 2019, the Tree Authority of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) sought permission to cut more than 2,700 trees in Aarey Colony to build a car shed for ColabaBandra SEEPZ Metro Line 3. Although the Supreme Court stayed the felling of trees on October 7, some damage had already been done as sufficient trees were cut on October 4, following an earlier order of the Bombay High Court that allowed the felling of trees. On October 8, the tribal residents in Aarey Colony organised a funeral for the lost trees and wildlife. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) had announced the 20kmlong ColabaBandra Metro Line in January 2004. The plan encompassed 146 kilometres of railway track, of which 32 kilometres was to be underground. In 2011, the MMRDA proposed to extend the Metro Line. A car shed was proposed on 30 hectares as part of the expansion. But following protests by the residents, the area for the car shed was scaled down to 20.82 hectares. After the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) declared Aarey Colony an ecosensitive zone (ESZ), the state government considered a private plot at Royal Palms, a residential project of Royal Palms India, according to the managing director of the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation. However, this, too, has been opposed by the residents as Royal Palms is situated inside Aarey Colony and is, therefore, a part of the ESZ. On April 15, 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed the application filed by social activist Amrita P. Bhattacharjee challenging Aarey Colony as the site for the metro line. While dismissing the petition, the court referred to the report of the Technical Committee on the feasibility of the metro depot in Aarey Colony. In September 2019, the MMRDA announced its plan to acquire 29,869 square feet of Aarey forest for a site office, labour camp and casting yard for the AndheriKanjurmarg Metro Line 3. The state government had given permission for the land acquisition, but after mass public protests, the MMRDA shelved its plan to acquire land in Aarey and decided to take up a plot of land in Wadala to build the casting yard. The MMRDA came under flak from local people, green activists and celebrities alike, who joined hands for the Save Aarey campaign. Earlier in 2016, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) had upheld the MoEFCC's decision to reduce the size of land for development purpose to 407 acres roughly the size of 18 Oval cricket grounds from the entire 15,000 acres of land in Aarey notified as ESZ. The ministry justified the reduced ESZ and said that the Metro car shed would be built in the excluded zone. Mumbaibased nonprofit Vanashakti had challenged this decision in the Supreme Court. On June 16, 2020, the apex court dismissed the plea, observing that "Mumbai was a congested city and Metro is important". However, by September, reports were already doing the rounds in media suggesting that the metro shed site had been closed and construction material was being moved out.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

328

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

October, 2020

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Land Acquisition Laws, Environmental Laws, Central/State Government Policy

Legislations/Policies Involved

  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Controversial land acquisition by the government

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Supreme Court of India; High Court of Bombay

Case Number

Suo Moto WP 2/2019; WP No. 2766/2017

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation (MMRC), Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Aarey Conservation Group, Vanashakti

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

After a long battle fought by environmental activists and local poeple to save what is known as Mumbai's 'green lung', the conflict over the Metro car shed in Aarey Colony is finally over. On October 11, 2020, Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray declared that the car shed, which was the bone of contention in the almost decadelong conflict, would be shifted out of Aarey forests and would now be built on government land in Kanjurmarg in central Mumbai. The chief minister also directed the police to withdraw all cases filed against Aarey protestors. The move to relocate the car shed comes after a landmark decision of the Maharashtra government in September to reserve 600 acres of land in Aarey as reserved forest. According to Thackeray, the decision will protect the rights of the tribal community living within the forest. Amitra Bhattacharjee from the Aarey Conservation Group said that the declaration was the first step towards conservation of Aarey. However, the proposed reserved forest area did not include the land on which the car shed was being built. Aarey Colony is home to a large number of tribespeople, who have lived in the area for generations and run cowsheds that supply milk to a governmentrun dairy. They have been opposing the metro car shed since it was proposed in 2011. They claimed that construction activity had destroyed a portion of wetlands in the area, which is crucial for streams to flow. Aarey is the catchment area of the Mithi river. Environmental experts too warned that any construction in the area could cause flooding. In October 2019, the Tree Authority of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) sought permission to cut more than 2,700 trees in Aarey Colony to build a car shed for ColabaBandra SEEPZ Metro Line 3. Although the Supreme Court stayed the felling of trees on October 7, some damage had already been done as sufficient trees were cut on October 4, following an earlier order of the Bombay High Court that allowed the felling of trees. On October 8, the tribal residents in Aarey Colony organised a funeral for the lost trees and wildlife. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) had announced the 20kmlong ColabaBandra Metro Line in January 2004. The plan encompassed 146 kilometres of railway track, of which 32 kilometres was to be underground. In 2011, the MMRDA proposed to extend the Metro Line. A car shed was proposed on 30 hectares as part of the expansion. But following protests by the residents, the area for the car shed was scaled down to 20.82 hectares. After the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) declared Aarey Colony an ecosensitive zone (ESZ), the state government considered a private plot at Royal Palms, a residential project of Royal Palms India, according to the managing director of the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation. However, this, too, has been opposed by the residents as Royal Palms is situated inside Aarey Colony and is, therefore, a part of the ESZ. On April 15, 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed the application filed by social activist Amrita P. Bhattacharjee challenging Aarey Colony as the site for the metro line. While dismissing the petition, the court referred to the report of the Technical Committee on the feasibility of the metro depot in Aarey Colony. In September 2019, the MMRDA announced its plan to acquire 29,869 square feet of Aarey forest for a site office, labour camp and casting yard for the AndheriKanjurmarg Metro Line 3. The state government had given permission for the land acquisition, but after mass public protests, the MMRDA shelved its plan to acquire land in Aarey and decided to take up a plot of land in Wadala to build the casting yard. The MMRDA came under flak from local people, green activists and celebrities alike, who joined hands for the Save Aarey campaign. Earlier in 2016, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) had upheld the MoEFCC's decision to reduce the size of land for development purpose to 407 acres roughly the size of 18 Oval cricket grounds from the entire 15,000 acres of land in Aarey notified as ESZ. The ministry justified the reduced ESZ and said that the Metro car shed would be built in the excluded zone. Mumbaibased nonprofit Vanashakti had challenged this decision in the Supreme Court. On June 16, 2020, the apex court dismissed the plea, observing that "Mumbai was a congested city and Metro is important". However, by September, reports were already doing the rounds in media suggesting that the metro shed site had been closed and construction material was being moved out.

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Forest

Total investment involved (in Crores):

328

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

October, 2020

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Land Acquisition Laws, Environmental Laws, Central/State Government Policy

Legislations/Policies Involved

  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Controversial land acquisition by the government

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Supreme Court of India; High Court of Bombay

Case Number

Suo Moto WP 2/2019; WP No. 2766/2017

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation (MMRC), Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Aarey Conservation Group, Vanashakti

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch

Other Land Conflicts in Maharashtra

cross
Not a member yet?
Sign up now