Kotak Mahindra Bank: RLLR: 0.75 | From: 8.7% - To: 10.5%
Union Bank of India: RLLR: 0.5 | From: 8.5% - To: 10%
Bank of Baroda: RLLR: 0.5 | From: 9.25% - To: 11%
HDFC Bank: RLLR: 0.75 | From: 8.5% - To: 8.8%

SC clears Adani's jetty project in Raigad, allows removal of 158 mangroves with safeguards

#Law & Policy#Infrastructure#India#Maharashtra#Mumbai City
Last Updated : 27th Jul, 2025
Synopsis

The Supreme Court has upheld an earlier order by the Bombay High Court allowing Adani Cementation Ltd to cut 158 mangrove trees in Maharashtra's Raigad district to develop a captive jetty along the Amba River. The project involves a 620-metre-long jetty with mechanised conveyor systems aimed at transporting cement, clinker, and raw materials through waterways instead of roads. This move is intended to reduce heavy vehicular traffic and carbon emissions. Despite opposition from an environmental NGO, the court has mandated compensatory afforestation and strict adherence to environmental safeguards as a condition for proceeding with the construction.

The Supreme Court has granted permission to Adani Cementation Ltd to proceed with the removal of 158 mangrove trees in the Raigad district of Maharashtra for the development of a jetty project. This decision came after the apex court reviewed and upheld a previous judgment delivered by the Bombay High Court, which had allowed the same clearance.


The proposed infrastructure includes a 620-metre-long captive jetty situated on the banks of the Amba River. As part of the plan, Adani Cementation will also construct a mechanised conveyor system. This facility is meant to transport cement, clinker, and other raw materials directly to and from the company's proposed cement grinding unit at Shahbaj village in Alibaug taluka. The transportation will be entirely water-based, aiming to reduce the load on the existing road network and cut carbon emissions by over 60 percent.

The Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG), a prominent Mumbai-based environmental NGO, had filed a petition opposing the project. The group argued that the Bombay High Court had failed to recognise the critical ecological value of mangroves and had wrongly placed commercial interests of a private company above environmental protection. However, the High Court and later the Supreme Court dismissed these claims.

The courts took into account that the project had received necessary approvals from both the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) and the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC). Furthermore, Adani Cementation is required to carry out compensatory afforestation by planting at least five times the number of mangroves that will be felled. This replantation must be done in nearby degraded mangrove patches identified in consultation with the Forest Department.

Additionally, the company must comply with all environmental safeguards during the construction and operation phases of the project. These include periodic environmental monitoring, maintenance of a buffer zone, and ensuring that no other mangroves are harmed in the process. The court noted that any non-compliance would result in immediate action by regulatory authorities.

The company defended the project by stating that it aligns with the Maharashtra Maritime Board?s 2016 policy to promote seaway logistics. This is expected to significantly reduce reliance on road transport, which has long been used to carry cement from manufacturing hubs in Karnataka and Vidarbha to western Maharashtra and Mumbai a distance often exceeding 500 kilometers.

Adani Cementation also highlighted additional sustainability measures. These include sourcing industrial and agricultural waste like fly ash and crop residue for fuel use in the cement plant, which could support local farmers and reduce stubble burning, a major contributor to seasonal air pollution in India.

This project has been designed with a long-term view of easing logistical congestion, supporting cleaner transport alternatives, and promoting industrial growth without compromising environmental responsibility. The courts acknowledged this larger goal, stating that the project, if executed responsibly, could benefit both industry and ecology.

Related News

Have something to say? Post your comment

Recent Messages