Supreme Court Aarey: Notice On 124 Trees For Film Institute

• The Supreme Court is reviewing a plea from the Tree Authority to fell 124 trees and replant 333 for a film institute in Aarey Village.
• The Court has issued notice, sought details on the project proponent and tree count, and requested responses from the Maharashtra government and intervenors.
• Chief Justice Kant questioned why the matter was not before the Bombay High Court and suggested transferring the entire case.
• This follows a January 2025 directive prohibiting further tree felling in Aarey without Supreme Court permission, stemming from a 2019 status quo order.
• The Court previously fined Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited INR 10 lacs for felling excess trees in Aarey in April 2023.

Lawyers advising on such projects must recognize that even with local No Objection Certificates, explicit Supreme Court permission is now a prerequisite for tree felling in Aarey.

The Supreme Court recently addressed an application from the Tree Authority concerning the proposed felling of 124 trees within Aarey Village. This request is tied to the development of a film institute, which also involves the replanting of 333 additional trees in the same region. The Court, comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V Mohana, heard the application today, September 16, 2026, issued notice, and has scheduled the matter for further hearing in two weeks.

During the proceedings, the bench sought clarification from the Tree Authority regarding the identity of the project proponent and the precise number of trees intended for removal. The Court also requested responses from both the Maharashtra government and all intervenors involved in the ongoing Aarey forest litigation. This specific project is planned for an area within Film City, designated for a graphic designing institute.

The Court was informed that Aarey Village encompasses a vast area, extending beyond the boundaries of the Aarey forest itself. Despite the Brihanmumbai Tree Authority having granted its No Objection Certificate (NOC) for the project, the Tree Authority approached the Supreme Court for explicit permission, acknowledging the necessity due to the Court's prior directives on tree felling in the region.

Chief Justice Kant expressed considerable concern over the application, questioning why the matter was brought before the Supreme Court rather than the Bombay High Court. He even suggested the possibility of transferring the entire case to the High Court, indicating a preference for local judicial bodies to handle such issues where appropriate. The bench was apprised that the overarching matter concerning the Aarey forest remains unresolved, leading to a continuous stream of such applications before the apex court.

This judicial scrutiny underscores the Supreme Court's stringent oversight of development projects impacting sensitive ecological zones. The requirement for explicit Supreme Court permission, even when local authorities like the Brihanmumbai Tree Authority have issued an NOC, highlights the elevated legal bar for any tree felling in the Aarey area. This approach aims to ensure environmental safeguards are not circumvented by local approvals alone.

The current proceedings are set against a backdrop of significant environmental litigation concerning Aarey. In January 2025, the Supreme Court had already issued a directive prohibiting the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation's tree authority from permitting any further tree felling in Mumbai’s Aarey colony without its express authorization. This directive reinforced a broader status quo order issued by the Court in 2019, which mandated the State of Maharashtra to cease all further tree cutting in Aarey.

The Court's involvement in Aarey began with a suo-moto cognizance taken on a letter from law student Rishav Ranjan. This letter, addressed to the then Chief Justice of India, sought a stay on tree cutting for the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited's (MMRCL) car shed project, which was planned on 33 hectares within Aarey Colony. The student's letter warned that construction for a "polluting industry" near the Mithi River, with its numerous channels and tributaries, could exacerbate flooding in Mumbai. The Supreme Court accepted this communication as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and subsequently established a special Bench to oversee the matter, titled IN RE FELLING OF TREES IN AAREY FOREST.

While the 2019 status quo order specifically prohibited further tree felling, the Court clarified that it did not halt the construction of the metro car shed project itself. More recently, in April 2023, the Supreme Court imposed a penalty of INR 10 lacs on MMRCL for felling an additional 84 trees beyond what was permitted, thereby contravening a previous court order. However, to prevent the public project from coming to a complete standstill, the Court also allowed MMRCL to remove an additional 177 trees.

The ongoing judicial engagement with the Brihanmumbai Tree Authority's Aarey plea, particularly concerning the Supreme Court Aarey 124 trees film institute project, sends a clear signal to developers and authorities alike. Any infrastructure or development project in Mumbai, especially those involving tree cutting in ecologically sensitive zones like Aarey, will face rigorous scrutiny from the apex court. The Court's consistent stance on maintaining the Aarey tree felling Supreme Court status quo underscores its commitment to environmental protection.

Lawyers advising on such projects must recognize that even with local No Objection Certificates, explicit Supreme Court permission is now a prerequisite for tree felling in Aarey. The Court's willingness to question the jurisdiction and potentially transfer such matters to the High Court further complicates the process, emphasizing the need for meticulous legal preparation and adherence to environmental law India Aarey. This judicial posture ensures that environmental considerations remain paramount in urban development planning.

Lawyers advising on infrastructure or development projects in Mumbai, particularly those involving tree felling in sensitive areas like Aarey, must note the Supreme Court's continued stringent oversight. Even with local NOCs, explicit Supreme Court permission is required, and the court is actively scrutinizing such pleas, potentially transferring them to the High Court.

Source: Reporting based on legal news coverage.