The Supreme Court upheld the Bombay High Court's decision rejecting CIDCO's proposal to relocate a sports complex from Ghansoli to Nanore village in Raigad. The court stressed that Mumbai's play areas should not be urbanised and that the proposed relocation lacked proper consideration of local needs. CIDCO's decision to repurpose the land for a residential project instead of a sports facility was criticised as arbitrary and illegal. The Supreme Court's ruling reinforces the importance of preserving designated public spaces for sports in Mumbai, ensuring that urban development does not infringe on such areas critical for public welfare.
The Supreme Court has affirmed a Bombay High Court decision rejecting CIDCO's plan to relocate a proposed sports complex from Ghansoli to Nanore village in Raigad, emphasising that play areas in Mumbai should not be subject to urbanisation.
When Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned the government's policy to allocate sports complexes across various districts, a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, along with Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, questioned the logic behind moving a facility meant for Mumbai, suggesting that Raigad district could instead receive an additional complex without displacing the one designated for Mumbai.
Mehta raised concerns regarding the Bombay High Court's authority to direct CIDCO to hand over the full land in Sectors 12 and 12A, Ghansoli, to the state government for sports complex development. He questioned if the High Court, through Article 226 of the Constitution, could override what he argued was an executive policy decision.
The Supreme Court justified the High Court's action, noting that the directive served the public interest. The High Court had earlier criticised CIDCO's decision to repurpose land originally designated for a sports complex, labelling its allotment to a builder for a residential project as "objectionable, arbitrary, and illegal." The matter originated from a PIL filed by the Indian Institute of Architects, which argued that a 2003 government resolution had divided a 61-acre plot, allocating 41 acres for a sports complex and the remainder for state development.
The state previously informed the High Court that out of the 41 acres intended for the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation's sports complex, CIDCO had transferred 36 acres to the civic body. The PIL contended that a 2021 decision by the state government unlawfully redirected the sports complex to Nanore village.
The High Court had expressed concerns that the decision to move the sports complex from Ghansoli to Nanore seemed to have been made without due consideration of the prevailing local needs and conditions, and was enacted without proper groundwork.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court has upheld a Bombay High Court ruling that rejects CIDCO's proposal to relocate a sports complex from Ghansoli to Nanore village, asserting that Mumbai's play areas should remain intact. The court emphasised the public interest in maintaining the designated site, highlighting concerns over the decision to allot this land for residential development instead of preserving it for sports.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
