Introduction

Perched atop the Sahyadri Mountains of Maharashtra at a height of over 2,600 feet above sea level is a small plateau of about 7 square kilometres, home to the serene town of Matheran with a population of just 5,000.

Serene hill station of Matheran at a height of over 2,600 feet above sea level Credit: BEAG Archive

Matheran has had the distinction of being the only car-free hill town in all of India and reportedly all of Asia.

In 2003, Matheran and its surrounding areas were declared by the Government of India to be an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ). The declaration was a culmination of the efforts by the Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG) since 1981 to preserve the fragile ecology of the region.

 Matheran is the third hill station in India after Mahableshwar and Panchgani to be declared an ESZ.

The plateau of Matheran (Marathi for forest on the top or wooded head) is surrounded by dense deciduous and semi-evergreen forests. Its porous red laterite soil soaks up the heavy monsoon rains and produces a unique and diverse flora, including a huge number of medicinal herbs and plants, for which the lush trees and the perennial mist provide protective cover.

Blue mornon state butterfly of Maharashtra Credit: BEAG Archive

Double Branded Crow species butterfly Credit: Sagar Sarang

The abundant forests are home to animals such as leopards, barking deers, Malabar giant squirrels, foxes, wild boars, and mongooses. The town itself has a large monkey population, including bonnet macaques and Hanuman langurs.

Hanuman langur Credit: David Cardoz

Lake Charlotte is the main source of Matheran’s drinking water. Groundwater and fresh water springs are also an important and major source of water supply to the area.

Charlotte lake monsoon Credit: David Cardoz

Tambdi Spring Credit: BEAG archives

Ukhli Spring Rambaugh Credit: BEAG archives

The Discovery of a Hill Station

Matheran was one of 80 “hill stations”established by the British during their colonial rule in India to protect the health of British soldiers by providing them a cool and natural environment.

In his book Resorts of the Raj, Hill Stations of lndia, published in 1997, Vikram Bhatt observed that primary motive for the founding of hill stations was to maintain the health of the British soldier.

“Extensive medical reports on the well-being of British troops linked good health to pure air and home-like environments, away from the scorching heat of the plains,”Bhatt wrote.

Beginning with Simla in 1819, the British built approximately 80 hill stations in 30 years, all of them situated at elevations between 1,200 and 8,000 feet.

Matheran is said to have been discovered in 1850 by Hugh Pointz Malet, the British Collector of Thane,  on a walk up the hill from a camp he had set up in the village of Chowk, located in the southwest of the hill spur. But there is at another historical account that claims that the credit for discovering Matheran goes to a Captain (later General) Barr of the Bombay Infantry, who had made a couple of ascents to Matheran before Malet’s. In fact, the house that Captain Barr built in Matheran is one of the oldest houses in the town. Known as Barr House, it is now a heritage hotel.

How Matheran Came to be Declared an ESZ

Aware of the environmental importance of preserving Matheran and its forests, BEAG had been persistently urging the Government of India for years to create a draft notification for Matheran to be declared an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ).

Matheran lush green forest on the slopes of during  monsoon Credit BEAG Archive

But getting the Government of India to issue the ESZ notification for Matheran and its surrounding areas was not an easy task. It was achieved in the teeth of a great deal of opposition—and misinformation—from local politicians, brick manufacturers, builders, quarry owners and others. Fierce arguments took place about the stipulations to be imposed.

BEAG had in fact worked laboriously to create a draft ESZ notification for Matheran and had submitted the document to the Government of India for Matheran as far back as 1998. From 1999, BEAG persistently urged the Government of Maharashtra to give its approval to the proposal for the ESZ declaration.

However, two years passed without response from the Government of Maharashtra, and BEAG finally decided to approach the Supreme Court.

In 2001, BEAG’s litigation in the Supreme Court resulted in the Supreme Court passing an order directing the Government of India to declare Matheran an ESZ to save it from environmental destruction.

Since it is the state government’s responsibility to demarcate areas in response to a judicial directive, the Government of Maharashtra immediately set up a committee to define the boundary of the ESZ and submitted it to the Government of India’s Ministry of Environment and Forests. (The ministry was renamed  Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change in 2014.)

In February 2002, the Ministry of Environment and Forests published draft of the Matheran ESZ notification, inviting public comment and on February 4, 2003, the Ministry officially declared Matheran and its surrounding areas, including the hills of Prabul, Peb, and Malangad, an Eco-Sensitive Zone.

However, there was a major difference in the size of the ESZ area between the draft notification published by the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 2002 and the final notification published by it in 2003.

 In the preliminary Matheran ESZ notification, 498 square kilometres had been notified as the ESZ. However, a committee set up by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, chaired by Professor Mohan Ram, used a narrow definition of what constitutes ecological sensitivity and reduced the ESZ in the final notification to 251 square kilometres.

BEAG filed an interlocutory application in 2003 (IA 659 under CWP 202 / 1995, T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Versus Union of India) with the Supreme Court to obtain an explanation from the Ministry for the reduction in the ESZ area, and, in its order of August 25, 2003 the Supreme Court asked the Ministry for an explanation.

The Ministry did not provide an explanation. Seventeen years later, on April 24, 2018,  the Supreme Court finally disposed of BEAG’s interlocutory application on Matheran with the observation that the proposal for declaring the area near Matheran as an eco-sensitive area had been issued in 2003 after all objections had been considered. 

Despite the reduction of the ESZ area, the entire town of Matheran and an area of more than 240 square kilometres around it, including the hills of Prabul, Peb and Malangad, had been included in the ESZ.

Matheran View of Prabal Morbe from Belvedere Point Credit BEAG Archives

The final ESZ is 251.56 square kilometres in area, of which 200 metres is a buffer zone, 7.23 square kilometres is under the jurisdiction of Matheran Municipal Council, and the rest—the surrounding forests, villages, tribal areas, and agricultural areas—is under the jurisdiction of various administrative authorities.

The total population of the area in the Matheran ESZ is 125,000, as per Census 2011, nearly 27 per cent of it is tribal.

The major food crops produced in villages in the ESZ are rice, cereals, and vegetables. Horticulture is also widely practised.

Matheran farming in the Eastern Range ESZ, Asal – Credit BEAG Archive

All activities in the forests—both within the area managed by the Matheran Municipal Council and outside it—are governed by the provisions of the Indian Forest Act of 1927 and the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980. All activities in the protected areas are governed by the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972.

Monitoring Compliance —the ESZ Monitoring Committee

The 2003 ESZ notification by the Ministry of Environment and Forests mandated the constitution of an eight-member Monitoring Committee responsible for ensuring that all developmental activities in the ESZ complied with the Government of India’s directives and with the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986.

The notification further stipulated that the Monitoring Committee had to be reconstituted every two years.

The first Monitoring Committee constituted as per the 2003 ESZ notification had its first meeting on March 29, 2004.

The  Monitoring Committee adjudicates on a wide spectrum of matters.

To date, the Committee has discussed issues such as the preparation of the Zonal Master Plan, the Sub Zonal Master Plans, the Tourism Master Plan, the Forest Master Plan, and the Forest Protection/ Management Plan, all of which were mandated in the ESZ notification.

The Committee is responsible for studying and approving all developmental activities in the ESZ to ensure that they are aligned with the objectives of the ESZ notification. Development proposals put forward by the various government authorities for any works to be undertaken in the ESZ are part of its monthly meeting agenda, as are ecological issues such as soil conservation and soil erosion control, air and water pollution, and the conservation of Charlotte Lake, Matheran’s main source of water.

Town planning is one of the chief concerns of the Committee’s mandated duties, so it regularly monitors issues relating to Matheran’s water supply, waste water management, solid waste management, drainage system issues, building repairs, materials to be used for retaining wall construction, and road paving, availability of ambulance, hospitals, and schools as well as supply of electricity and other amenities to villages in the ESZ. Until the approval of the Zonal Master Plan by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, all development activities including alterations, demolitions, repairs, renovations and restorations of buildings require prior approval of the Monitoring Committee.

Transportation and tourism issues such as road proposals, ropeway proposals, the transport of construction material to Matheran. valley crossing, the resumption of the railway shuttle service from Neral to Matheran also come up for detailed discussion.

The Committee is also considering proposals for the establishment of a Nature Interpretation Centre and a communication tower.

Minutes of Monitoring Committee Meetings

Although the ESZ notification had stipulated that a monitoring committee be reconstituted every two years, the directive has not always been strictly followed, often to the detriment of the people of Matheran and its environs.

The first Monitoring Committee was constituted in 2004 under the chairmanship of Shri Mukhopadyay held 4 meetings.

 The second Monitoring Committee was reconstituted in 2009, after a gap of three years, under the chairmanship of Shri V. Ranganathan which held 10 meetings 

Mr. Ranganathan chairman Monitoring Committee addressing locals along with the Members of the Committee. Credit: BEAG Archive

 The third Monitoring Committee was reconstituted in 2012, after a gap of one year, under the chairmanship of Shri V. Ranganathan which held 10 meetings.   

 The fourth Monitoring Committee was reconstituted in 2017, after a gap of three years, under the chairmanship of Shri W. Gorde which held 9 meetings.

 An Interim Monitoring Committee was constituted in 2020, after a gap of one year, under the chairmanship of the Konkan Divisional Commissioner. In the year 2020, in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, the residents of Matheran approached the Bombay High Court requesting that they be allowed to secure the supply of essential goods by means of tempos and trucks during the lockdown due to the unavailability of delivery handcarts and horses. As the ESZ notification prohibits vehicular traffic in the Matheran ESZ, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change appointed an Interim Monitoring Committee on May 13, 2020 to have the goods brought to Matheran in a manner that was in compliance with the ESZ Notification. This Committee held 2 meetings. 

A decade and a half to plan – the Zonal Master Plan

The 2003 ESZ notification mandated the preparation of a Zonal Master Plan for the ESZ within a period of two years. The Zonal Master Plan was to be comprised of five separate plans:

• a Sub Zonal Master Plan for the area governed by the Matheran Municipal Council; this plan is often referred to as the Developmental Plan;
• a Sub Zonal Master Plan for the areas outside the jurisdiction of the Matheran Municipal Council area; this plan is also known as the Regional Plan;
• a Tourism Master Plan for the ESZ;
• a Forest Master Plan;
• a Forest Protection/Management Plan.

A decade and a half later, the Zonal Master Plan was nowhere near prepared.

It took the Government of Maharashtra16 years after the 2003 ESZ notification that had mandated the preparation of the Zonal Master Plan within two years to submit only three components of the Plan—the Sub Zonal Master Plan for the town of Matheran (the Development Plan), the Sub Zonal Master Plan for the ESZ area outside the town of Matheran (the Regional Plan), and the Tourism Master Plan—to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change for approval.

In fact, it was only due to BEAG’s petition before the National Green Tribunal that the Government of Maharashtra initiated the process for preparing these plans in 2016 and submitted them for approval to the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change between 2016 and 2018.

The other components of the Zonal Master Plan, such as the Heritage plan and its regulations for the ESZ area outside the town of Matheran (which were to be included in the Regional Plan),the Forest Master Plan, and the Forest Management Plan have yet to be submitted by the Government of Maharashtra to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.

 BEAG continues its battle for the preparation of the Zonal Master Plan in its entirety, as mandated by the ESZ notification of 2003.   

The Sub Zonal Master Plan for Matheran Municipal Council area

Two of the most important components of the Zonal Master Plan mandated by the 2003 ESZ notification are the Sub Zonal Master Plan for the area managed by the Matheran Municipal Council (this plan is also referred to as the Developmental Plan) and the Sub Zonal Master Plan for the rest of the ESZ (this plan is often referred to as the Regional Plan).

The February 2003 ESZ notification had given the Government of Maharashtra two years to prepare the Zonal Master Plan, but it was only in 2010, seven years later, that the Government of Maharashtra published one component of it, namely the Draft Development Plan, report, and DCR for the areas managed by the Matheran Municipal Council. Draft plans must be published in the state’s official gazette and at least two local newspapers to invite suggestions and objections from the public, as per the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act of 1966.

 BEAG, being a member of the Monitoring Committee, continued to be involved in the entire process of promoting sustainable development in the region, and filed suggestions and objections to the draft Development Plan published in 2010.

Three years later, on October 14, 2013, the Government of Maharashtra published a revised draft Development Plan, which contained major modifications, to elicit public suggestions and objections for the modifications. Major modifications to a plan are called Excluded Part under Section 31 of the MRTP Act.    

 Among the minor modifications in the revised draft Development Plan—minor modifications are automatically sanctioned by the state government—BEAG was heartened to see included a set of regulations that had been carefully drafted by BEAG under the advice of heritage architects and submitted as part of its suggestions and objections. The regulations drafted by BEAG had been published as DCR 82. The official title of DCR 82 is ‘Design Control and Regulations for the Preservation of Existing Townscape Character in Matheran’.

 After a detailed study of the major modifications (termed Excluded Part) in the revised draft Development Plan, BEAG sent its suggestions and objections to the Government of Maharashtra.

It took another three years for the Government of Maharashtra to approve the major modifications. On  January 21, 2016, the Excluded Part of the Development Plan was sanctioned by the state government.

Much to BEAG’s consternation, however, the sanctioned Development Plan had various provisions that were contrary to the letter and spirit of the ESZ notification—provisions such as deemed forests being demarcated as a Residential Zone, increase in FSI, and widening of roads and reservations for affordable housing. In fact, the provisions were also in contradiction of the Government of Maharashtra’s own circular disallowing such schemes in Matheran. The Development Plan also included specific projects that the state government had itself decided not to proceed with, such as the funicular railway project, shelved due to unfeasibility, Moreover, the heritage regulations that had been notified in the plan were also incomplete, lacking the provisions for appeal, penalty and criteria for listing.

 Only a few months later, on August 6, 2016, the Government of Maharashtra forwarded the Development Plan to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change for approval.

However, the Ministry returned the Development Plan to the Government of Maharashtra on April  10, 2017, stating that it was a “report”, not a Sub Zonal Master Plan and asked it to submit a consolidated Zonal Master Plan as envisaged by the 2003 ESZ notification.

BEAG continues its effort to be involved with the Zonal Plan through litigation in NGT.

Development Plan Archive

Before Matheran was declared an ESZ, it was governed by regulations of the Development Plan sanctioned by the Urban Development Department of the Government of Maharashtrain 1987.

Development Plan of 1980

In March 1980, a draft Development Plan was published by the state Urban Development Department (UDD) inviting suggestions and objections from the public. The main demand of the plan was that a motorable road be built into the centre of town, a proposal backed by local businesses and hoteliers in Matheran.

BEAG pointed out that a motorable road into the town centre would result in severe air pollution and would destroy the fragile ecosystem not just of the town but its surrounding areas too.

BEAG expressed its concerns to local groups and authorities, but the demand to build a motorable road persisted. In the revised draft Development Plan submitted by the Urban Development Department two years later on January 4, 1983 to the Government of Maharashtra, the demand made a prominent appearance and was accompanied by other environmentally hazardous demands such as demands to increase building sizes in Matheran.

Not to be outdone, BEAG put forward its own plan, one that proposed to freeze development until an ecologically sustainable plan could be prepared to determine the carrying capacity of Matheran.

In January 1987, BEAG’s efforts bore fruit: the Government of Maharashtra finally turned down the demand for the motorable road as well as several other deleterious proposals for road widening, doubling ground coverage, and classifying ground floors as basements.

Proposed Modification in 1996 to the Development Plan of 1980

Despite the Government of Maharashtra’s 1987 ruling against the motorable road into Matheran, the Matheran Municipal Council sought in 1996 to re-introduce the demand.

The draft Development Plan that the Matheran Municipal Council put forward in 1996 was in fact a modified version of the rejected Development Plan of 1980, which had also sought the motorable road.

There were additional demands in this 1996 modification to the 1980 Development Plan such as demands for amusement parks and water parks, FSI increase for hotels, and two ropeways.

In 2000, BEAG petitioned the Bombay High Court against the Matheran Municipal Council’s draft Development Plan of 1996.

LITIGATIONS

Writ Petition No. 45/2000

On June 27, 2001, the Bombay High Court stayed the operation of Matheran Municipal Council’s draft Development Plan of 1996 a modification to the 1980 Development Plan which had sought for motorable roads, amusement parks, and water parks, FSI increase for hotels, and two ropeways.

In 2005, the Government of Maharashtra also rejected the draft Development Plan of 1996, stating that the declaration in 2003 of Matheran (and surrounding region) as an Eco-Sensitive Zone mandated the preparation of a Zonal Master Plan for the entire ESZ which would include a Sub Zonal Master Plan for the Municipal Council area.

 As the original cause of action in the BEAG’s petition did not exist anymore, the Bombay High Court in 2018 allowed BEAG to withdraw its petition and granted it permission to take appropriate steps to better protect Matheran and its environs.

Before the National Green Tribunal – for implementation of the provisions of the Eco-Sensitive Zone Notification

Original Application (OA) – 45/2016

In the absence of a Monitoring Committee—which had not been reconstituted since 2014—and the lack of response from the state administration to BEAG’s representations about various activities that were occurring in the ESZ in violation of the ESZ notification, in 2016, BEAG appealed to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) (OA45 / 2016) to adjudicate on the following issues:

• constitution of the Monitoring Committee for the Matheran ESZ
• constitution of the Heritage Conservation Committee for the Matheran ESZ
• demolition of illegal constructions in Matheran
• abatement of sewage and solid waste pollution in Matheran
• finalization of the Zonal Master Plan for the Matheran ESZ

Over the next two years, the NGT passed several orders on the issues raised in BEAG’s original application of 2016. Its final ruling, and the disposal of the application, came on August 23, 2018.

With regard to the constitution of the Monitoring Committee, the NGT noted in its order of March 22, 2017 that the Monitoring Committee had been duly constituted on March 1, 2017—that is, a year  after BEAG’s application—and ordered the newly-constituted committee to submit  a status report on ESZ compliance with the 2003 ESZ Notification and with the orders issued by the Supreme Court, the High Court and the NGT. However, the Monitoring Committee failed to submit the status report, and on March 22, 2017, the NGT directed the member secretary of the Monitoring Committee—the District Collector of Raigad—to be present at the next NGT hearing with complete information on ESZ compliance.

With regard to the Heritage Conservation Committee, the NGT noted that the committee had been constituted under the chairmanship of Shri. S. B. Patil on July 5, 2018.

With regard to illegal constructions, the NGT passed an order on January 10, 2017, disallowing new construction in the Matheran municipal area and authorizing demolition by law enforcement authorities of any construction that did come up.  On August 10, 2017, the NGT noted that it had received an affidavit from the District Collector of Raigad stating that 28 illegal structures had been detected but demolition action against the illegal structures had been halted on account of the status-quo order passed by the Bombay High Court in the petitions filed by the owners of those structures.

With regard to effluent discharge, the NGT, in its order of March 22, 2017, directed the Monitoring Committee to carry out a survey of effluent discharge in the area governed by the Matheran Municipal Council and to verify whether any untreated effluents were being released within the ESZ. It also ordered the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board to take action against the structures, hotels and resorts that were discharging untreated effluents within the ESZ.

The matter of the Zonal Master Plan submission proved to be a difficult one to resolve.

In its order of March 22, 2017, the NGT directed the Government of Maharashtra to submit the complete Zonal Master Plan to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change for approval within two months and to approach it within a week if it had any difficulty in sending the plan to the Ministry.

However, no action was taken by the Government of Maharashtra to comply with the NGT order.

The NGT therefore issued a show-cause notice on May 24, 2017 to the Government of Maharashtra asking why coercive action under Order 21 Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure should not be taken against it to compel it to discharge its obligations arising out of the NGT order of March 22, 2017.

In its reply, the Government of Maharashtra reiterated the statement it had made at the NGT’s July 6, 2017 hearing that it had already sent the Zonal Master Plan to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change for approval on August 6, 2016.

The plan that the state government had submitted to the Ministry for approval was the draft Development Plan for the area within Matheran town. The Development Plan is a Sub-Zonal Master Plan, one of the five components of the Zonal Master Plan. However, the state government had not submitted the Regional Plan nor any of the other components of the Zonal Master Plan.

The Ministry responded by stating that the plan that had been sent by the Government of Maharashtra for approval was not a Zonal Master Plan as envisaged in the ESZ notification.

In fact, the state authority that was actually responsible for preparing the Zonal Master Plan—the Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA)—did not even appear during the NGT hearings in 2016. The MMRDA is the sole authority responsible for preparing most plans—including regional plans—in the Mumbai metropolitan region. The only plans it does not prepare are development plans, which are formulated by municipal councils and corporations.

The MMRDA’s failure to attend NGT hearings prompted the tribunal to issue an order on July 13, 2016 stating that it would proceed ex parte against  the MMRDA. It was only  a year later that MMRDA did attend the NGT hearings on the matter, prompting the tribunal in its order of August 10, 2017 to set aside its order to proceed ex parte against the MMRDA. The NGT also ordered the agency to pay Rs.10,000 to BEAG as costs.

Despite the MMRDA appearing before the NGT, there was still no sign of the Sub Zonal Master Plan for the region (the areas outside the Matheran Council governance). The MMRDA kept claiming that the Regional Plan for the Mumbai metropolitan region was the Zonal Master Plan for the Matheran ESZ.

But BEAG continued to challenge the MMRDA’s claim, and at last the MMRDA submitted a separate Regional Plan for Matheran ESZ in June 2018.

On August 23, 2018, the NGT passed its final order on BEAG’s original petition (OA 110 / 2018, earlier OA 45 / 2016 WZ) , directing the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change to take responsibility for finalizing the Zonal Master Plan within two months.

In its final order, the NGT also levied a fine of Rs 1,00,000 on the Government of Maharashtra for taking more than 15 years to prepare the Zonal Master Plan, and warned that a fine of Rs 10, 000 per day would be levied on the agency causing any further delay, be it the Government of Maharashtra or the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change.

 The NGT explained the reason for the fines in strong words: “Despite of limitation prescribed under law, Zonal Master Plan of the said area, which was to come within two years (of the 2003 ESZ notification), have not been completed, despite of passage of more than 15 years. The non-seriousness about the issue by the Ministry as well as the State Government clearly reflects with no iota of doubt. In the meanwhile, the area has been exploited by the private parties by raising constructions and using it for their vested interest and running a business. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and keeping in view the necessity and urgency of the matter, we direct the MoEF to finalize the Zonal Master Plan for Eco-Sensitive Zone of Matheran Hill Station within a period of two months.”

 But the Zonal Master Plan continued to remain elusive.

Execution Application – 54 / 2018

 On November 27, 2018, BEAG filed an Execution Application  with the NGT reporting non-compliance with its order of August 23, 2018 on submission of the complete Zonal Master Plan within two months. Not only had the Government of Maharashtra failed to submit the complete Zonal Master Plan, it continued to maintain that the Sub Zonal Master Plan for the Regional Plan area was the complete Zonal Master Plan. Moreover, the Government of Maharashtra was claiming to the NGT that it had received the Ministry’s approval for the submitted plan on the basis of a letter from the Ministry dated October 31, 2018 enclosing minutes of the ESZ meeting of October 20, 2018 and requesting required information from the Government of Maharashtra.

The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change acknowledged that it had received a new draft of the Zonal Master Plan from the Government of Maharashtra on December 6, 2018 but it had been unable to take a final decision on account of the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.

The new draft that the Ministry had received was of the Regional Plan. BEAG pointed out that the new draft Zonal Master Plan submitted to the Ministry was not the complete Zonal Master Plan as it did not include all the components of the Zonal Master Plan. In fact, even the Regional Plan that had been submitted in 2018 did not include the mandated Heritage lists and regulations for the SZMP for the region, and the Forest Plan been never been submitted.

The Sub Zonal Master Plan for the Matheran municipal area (the Development Plan) had also not been appended to the Zonal Master Plan. In fact, Chapter 7 of the submitted draft stated that the Development Plan had already been sanctioned by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change on October 10, 2018—one of the many claims challenged by BEAG’s Executive Application of 2018.

On May 6, 2019, the NGT noted that “nothing of substance appears to have been done” even until December 2018, when a “defective draft notification was prepared by the Government of Maharashtra,” despite the NGT’s order directing it to submit the Zonal Master Plan by October 23, 2018.

Still, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change went ahead and gave its approval to the Maharashtra government’s draft “Zonal Master Plan” by letter on July 23, 2019.

In its final order on August 23, 2019 on BEAG’s Execution Application of 2018, the NGT observed that it had received a letter a month ago from a scientist with the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change stating that the Ministry had finally approved the Zonal Master Plan but, the tribunal noted, “a bare perusal of the letter of 23.07.2019 shows that it does not categorically mention the date on which the master plan was finally approved.” What the letter did mention was that the Ministry had made suggestions for changes to the draft Zonal Master Plan that were to be incorporated by the Government of Maharashtra, which “leaves no room of doubt that so far as finalization of Master Plan by Ministry is concerned, the same had not been done till 23.07.2019 when the aforesaid letter was issued.” The NGT concluded that “we hold that it is very clearly reflected from the letter of 23.07.2019 that the version given before us is not correct.”

The NGT stated that even if were to assume that the plan had been approved in July 2019, that was still nine months after the deadline it had mandated in its order of August 23, 2018. The NGT, therefore, imposed a fine of Rs. 27,00,000 and a recurring cost of Rs. 10,000 per day for the period from October 23, 2018 to July 23, 2019 on the Ministry for the delay.

In addition, the NGT gave BEAG permission to point out any issue in the final plans that was not in accordance with the law.

Review Application – 49/2019

The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change protested against the fine imposed by the NGT, filing a Review Application in September 2019,  requesting that the penalty of Rs. 27 lakhs be reviewed.

But the NGT dismissed the Ministry’s petition on December 18, 2019, stating, “The Ministry has, by way of this review application, taken the stand that the delay in this case is on account of the State Government. It may be mentioned that it was the duty of MoEF to comply with the order of 23.08.2019, within a period of two week and they were fully aware that in case of default they would be liable for further recurring cost of Rs. 10,000/- per day. Further, in case the State Government had not submitted the requisite information, as stated by the Counsel for the Ministry, they should have taken appropriate steps for procuring the information or take steps with regard to recover the recurring cost from the concerning officer either of the Ministry or the State.”

Miscellaneous Application – 2020

But in March 2020, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change again filed a Miscellaneous Application with the NGT, requesting it to review the penalty of Rs 27,00,000. The matter is still pending.

Original Application 93 / 2019

BEAG continued to focus on the completion of the Zonal Master Plan.

On November 13, 2019, BEAG once again filed an original application with the NGT  requesting that the tribunal:

• direct the Government of Maharashtra to ensure that the ZMP was completed in compliance with the requirements of the 2003 ESZ Notification;
• instruct the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board to close down and prosecute all the units, structures, hotels and resorts that were running despite lacking consent to operate under the Water Act and Air Act;
• instruct the Matheran Municipal Council to disallow construction until a duly-approved final Zonal Master Plan was brought into force and to carry out demolitions of all illegal constructions that had been permitted in the absence of the Zonal Master Plan;
• seek environmental compensation from the State of Maharashtra and the Matheran Municipal Council for the damage caused to the fragile ecology of the Matheran ESZ due to the unabated illegal constructions that had been permitted in the absence of the Zonal Master Plan and to restore the damaged areas at the cost of the perpetrators of the illegal constructions while carrying out other actions required by the applicable laws;
• instruct the Matheran Municipal Council to set up sewage treatmentplants and effluent treatment plans where required.

 On February 13, 2020, the NGT ordered the Government of Maharashtra to disallow any new construction in the ESZ.

 In its December 14, 2020 hearing, the NGT finally disposed of BEAG’s application.

Regarding the completion of the ZMP, the tribunal stated in its ruling that despite the difference of opinion between the parties, the ZMP has been finalised and published and the only issues that remained were that of coordination and checking up on the factual position. The tribinal suggested that the issues be managed by a senior authority of the state who could coordinate with the different state authorities to ensure compliance.

The NGT also allowed  BEAG make a representation before the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development Department.

Regarding pollution by structures and hotels, the tribunal observed that the state Pollution Control Board had presented a report on October 14, 2020 stating that it had issued closure directions under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, against seven hotels that had been operating without consent.  The state PCB had also issued notices to the non-compliant hotels, requiring them to show cause why they should not be closed and why they should not be forced to pay compensation. The state PCB had also issued a prosecution notice to the Municipal Council and asked for compensation.

Regarding sewage and effluence management, the tribunal stated that waste management is a constitutional obligation of the Matheran Municipal Council and it should enforce “environmental norms”

BEAG has made a detailed presentation before the Principal Secretary UDD and will continue to follow up to  ensure compliance of the ESZ notification.

Challenge to the NGT Order

In January 2017, four writ petitions were filed by Matheran hoteliers before the Bombay High Court challenging the NGT order of January 10, 2017 directing the authorities to demolish all unauthorized structures in Matheran in accordance with the law.

In June 2018, the petitions were dismissed by the High Court, which stated that it did not find any reason to interfere either with the impugned NGT order or with the notices issued by the Matheran Municipal Council.

 

Disqualification of Municipal Councillors

Illegal constructions had started sprouting up all over Matheran in the 1980s and 1990s, some of which belonged to members of the Matheran Municipal Council.

In response to BEAG’s concerted letter campaign, in March 2015, the District Collector of Raigad issued show-cause notices to 19 of the 20 Matheran municipal councillors, including the President and Vice-President.

After deliberating over the matter for the next 13 months, the Collector disqualified only three of the 19 councilors to whom he had served legal notices.

Regardless of the result, the action put pressure on Matheran’s councilors.

Supreme Court rulings on Matheran

In 2001, BEAG filed an interlocutory application (IA 659 / 2001) under CWP 202 / 1995, T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Versus Union of India, on the valuation of forests) to bring urgent issues in Matheran to the Supreme Court’s attention.

On May 10, 2001, two years before Matheran had even been declared an ESZ, the Supreme Court had passed an order with three major directives for the Government of Maharashtra.

The first instruction was that the state government was to prohibit tempos, tractors, and any other mechanized vehicles into Matheran. The court had also stated that neither the state of Maharashtra nor any other civil authority would be permitted to change the use of roads in Matheran.

The Supreme Court had also instructed the Government of Maharashtra to prevent illegal felling of trees in Matheran and to conduct a forest survey and report on the forests in Matheran’s forest land and on tree cover in the non-forest land of Matheran irrespective of ownership.

Lastly, the Supreme Court had stated that renewal of any property leases in Matheran by the Revenue Department would be subject to the outcome of the applications pending before it.

In response to the Supreme Court’s orders, the Government of Maharashtra filed an affidavit explaining its progress on carrying out the Supreme Court order. The affidavit stated that vehicles, except for an ambulance and a fire engine, were being prohibited and the forest survey was underway, but additional employees were required for the removal of solid waste.

On July 12, 2001, the Supreme Court observed that the affidavit filed by the Government of Maharashtra was “very cryptic and lacked necessary particulars” and instructed it to submit additional details and documents with the affidavit in order to substantiate its averments. The court also asked the state government to file the forest survey report it had asked for in its order of May 10, 2001.

The Supreme Court provided further clarification on its May 10, 2001 directives, stating that only an ambulance and a fire-engine would be permitted on the roads of Matheran regardless of whether these vehicles had been granted permits. It also stated that the movement or sale of timber felled by natural causes or otherwise from Matheran would not be allowed.

The Supreme Court observed that the state government had stated in its affidavit that it had given its approval to the Government of India for Matheran to be declared an eco-sensitive zone by its letter dated November 21, 2000, and the court directed that Matheran be regarded as an Eco-Sensitive Zone, pending the Government of India’s announcement.

On September 9, 2001, the Supreme Court observed that the Ministry of Environment and Forests had asked the Government of Maharashtra in a letter dated letter dated July 24, 2001 to provide specifics about the area of Matheran that was to be declared an eco-sensitive area. The lead counsel for the Ministry of Environment and Forests stated that the correspondence had been received and a notification declaring the area as ESZ would be issued forthwith. The court therefore ordered the notification to be placed on record by next hearing as proof of compliance with the Supreme Court order.

On February 18, 2002, the Supreme Court observed that the Ministry of Environment and Forests had issued the notification on February 6, 2002 containing a draft proposal for notifying Matheran and its surrounding areas as an ESZ, and directed the Ministry to issue the final notification within four months.

The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change explained that notices had been issued for the removal of unauthorized construction by way of encroachment or excess erection, and in cases where the notice was not complied with, the Collector would be appointed as receiver to take physical possession of such construction until such time that the individual who had erected it either demolished it himself or paid the cost of demolition. The Ministry said it would file an application about such cases.

On April 17, 2003, the Supreme Court directed that the matter of unauthorized constructions be referred to the Central Empowered Committee for its response.

On August 25, 2003, the Supreme Court directed the Government of India to file a copy of the ESZ notification as well as copies of any objections filed against the draft notification regarding the boundary of Matheran, and a copy of the final notification that had been issued thereafter explaining how the area originally indicated as 498 square kilometres had been reduced to 214 square kilometres.

On January 30, 2004, the Supreme Court granted the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change two additional weeks to file a response on the reduction of the ESZ area on the condition that it would submit along with a copy of the ESZ notification an affidavit containing complete details on the constitution of a monitory committee for the ESZ.

As the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change had amended the Matheran Eco-Sensitive Zone notification of February  4, 2003 by a notification (SO 83-E) dated 16 January 16, 2004, permitting one standby ambulance and fire engine and deleting the provision for permitting tractors, on January 28, 2005, the Supreme Court directed the Ministry to check whether the final notification had been issued by the Ministry, and if not, to file it within two weeks.

On April 08, 2005, the Supreme Court (IA 930 in IA 659 and 669) directed the Ministry to place on record the final notification.

On March 09, 2018, in other applications filed pertaining to the declaration of Matheran as ESZ, the Supreme Court granted time to the Government of India’s Survey Department to submit a status report within four weeks.

On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court observed that the proposal for declaring the area near Matheran as an ESZ had been issued back in 2003 after all objections had been considered. The matter of the reduced ESZ area ended there.

HERITAGE

The Government of India’s 2003 Notification declaring Matheran an ESZ stipulated that man-made and natural heritage sites be given statutory protection, in accordance with the Government of India’s Draft Model Regulations.

 Matheran had several buildings that had been declared heritage structures by listings published well before the ESZ Notification.

 The British did not tend to vary the design of hill stations very much. The design of hill stations reflected the British concern for picturesque beauty and variety, with the mall as the central element of the hill station and the surroundings spread out like the landscape of the English countryside.

In Matheran, the mall, or bazaar, is located on the elevated plateau due to its relatively even grade that allows easy walking, without having to negotiate great climbs or descents.

Thefounder of Matheran, Hugh Pointz Malet, had identified for himself and his friends in 1850 the site of the first five houses on the hill. The formal survey of the hill had begun in 1851 and was completed in the Survey of India maps of 1866 and 1867.In 1905, the Matheran municipality was formed with a president as its head.

The typical Indian bungalow, which the British had already adopted widely for use in the plains and exported to other colonies around the world, was also adopted for Matheran. The design of the bungalow allowed for the use of local building materials and a partly vernacular construction.

Lord Elphinstone, the then Governor of Bombay was a great patron of the hill station, as were the leading Parsees and Bohras of Bombay. Among the rich and famous who favoured Matheran were Jamshedji Tata, Sir Ratan Tata, Sir Pherozshah Mehta, Sir Cowasjee Jehangir, and Sir Dinshaw Petit.

Sir Adamjee Peerbhoy, a rich businessman and philanthropist of Bombay established the Neral-Matheran toy train service in 1907. This service, presently owned by the Central Railway is still the favourite mode of travel of tourists.

Heritage Conservation in Matheran

In 1995, the Government of Maharashtra issued an order that would galvanise BEAG to get started on one of its key objectives: protecting heritage structures.

The Government of Maharashtra’s directive was addressed to Municipal Commissioners of the cities that had existing heritage lists. It ordered the Municipal Commissioners to prepare and publish their heritage list in the Government of Maharashtra Gazette for public suggestions and objections.

Matheran’s heritage buildings were first documented in 2000. In fact, Matheran is only the third hill station, after Mahableshwar and Panchgani, to have a Heritage List.

It was due to BEAG’s persistence in protecting Matheran’s heritage that the Mumbai Metropolitan (MMR-HCS) Heritage Conservation Society commissioned the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) to conduct a study of Matheran and prepare a listing of Matheran’s heritage.

INTACH’s heritage list was notified by the Matheran Municipal Council in 2004 for public suggestions. The final list had 212 heritage buildings and 99 natural sites in Matheran. draft notification of 2004 

On January 2019, the Government of Maharashtra notified the final heritage list. But the list included none of the 99 natural heritage sites that had been recommended by INTACH.  As the deletion of the 99 natural sites are in complete contravention of the ESZ notification, BEAG continues to pursue their inclusion with the UDD.  

Heritage Conservation Committee

The committee is a technical advisory committee constituted by the Government of Maharashtra. It is tasked with several responsibilities: implementing heritage regulations to conserve and protect listed heritage sites, formulating special heritage regulations when required, imposing conditions when necessary for heritage and environmental conservation, preparing supplementary lists of buildings and natural heritage sites, framing guidelines relating to design elements, and scrutinizing and granting approvals for development.

The tenure of the Committee is three years.

 The first HCC was constituted for the period under the chairmanship of Shri. Dev Mehta. 2006 to 2009 held 6 meetings.  

The second HCC was constituted for after a gap of one year under the chairmanship of Shri. Dev Mehta 2010 to  2013 which held 11 meetings.

The third HCC is now constituted after a gap of eight years is now constituted under the chairmanship of Shri. S.B. Patil. 2018 to  2021 which held 2 meetings.    

DEEMED FORESTS ON THE MATHERAN PLATEAU

In 1996, the Supreme Court had defined forest as a dense growth of trees and underbrush covering a large area. The court had stipulated that the provisions enacted in the Forest Conservation Act of 1980 must apply to all deemed forests (Vansadrushya – Marathi term for Forest Alike), irrespective of their ownership or classification.

As per this judgment, the word ‘forest’ must be understood according to its dictionary meaning and covers all statutorily recognized forests, whether designated as reserved, protected or otherwise, for the purpose of Section 2(1) of the Forest Conservation Act. The term ‘forest land’ occurring in Section 2,  the judgement declared, would include not only “forest”as understood in the dictionary sense, but also any area recorded as ‘forest’in government records irrespective of the ownership.

In 2001, the Supreme Court ordered the Government of Maharashtra to conduct a survey of the forest and non-forest land of Matheran i.e. 512 plots that must be surveyed irrespective of the ownership of the land, and report on the forest and tree cover.  

In 2011, ten years after the Supreme Court order, the Revenue Department of the Government of Maharashtra had surveyed only 155 plots of the 512 plots in Matheran.

And, the surveyed plots had been demarcated as a“Tree Conservation Zone”by the Maharashtra Planning Committee in the Development Plan submitted to the Government of Maharashtra.

Tree Conservation Zone is a new term coined to replace the old No Development Zone and has the same intent —to disallow construction but permit activities such as agriculture, horticulture, nurseries, parks and gardens.

BEAG pointed out that allowing activities such as agriculture, horticulture, nurseries, parks and gardens would be inconsistent with the ESZ notification.

BEAG also drew attention to several discrepancies in the Revenue Department’s survey and maps, for example the fact that the compilation submitted by the Range Forest Officer contained information for 202 plots but had provided maps for only 155 plots, and the fact that the maps did not contain legends or use uniform colours for indicating forested areas.

BEAG brought these discrepancies to the attention of the Monitoring Committee for Matheran ESZ. The matter came up for discussion at the Monitoring Committee meeting held in September 2012.  

However, the term of the Monitoring Committee came to an end in 2014.

BEAG continued to persistently follow up with the Collector of Raigad and was finally assured by the Collector, in response to BEAG’s various representations, that the survey of the remaining plots would be completed within two months.

In February 2018, the Collector of Raigad directed the Karjat Deputy Superintendent of Land Records and the Alibag Forest Conservator to complete the survey of the remaining plots within a month and submit their reports.

BEAG has been informed that the survey has been completed and is currently following up with the Government of Maharashtra that it be included in the Development Plan as Deemed Forest/Vansadrushya.