The petitions were filed last week by persons claiming to be environmentalists challenging the proposal/decision of the Maharashtra government and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to develop a theme park at the race course.

The petitions said the decision was "arbitrary, capricious, and patently illegal" and that the race course was one of the few remaining large open spaces in the city and converting it into a theme park would be an environmental disaster.

Poll

Who will win the Punjab Elections?

BJP 32.86%

AAP 41.43%

INC 25.71%

Submit

View All In Poll

The petitioners relied on a meeting held in December 2023 which was attended by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and top officials of the BMC and the Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd (RWITC), which operates the race course on the state-leased land. In this meeting, a decision was taken to develop a theme park at the race course, they claimed.

On Wednesday, Advocate General Saraf told the court the petitions were premature as no final decision has been taken yet on the project. "It is still at a proposal stage...ideation stage. Nothing is crystallized now. It is not like the Chief Minister takes one meeting and a final decision is taken," Saraf submitted.

As per the petitions, the lessee of the land -- RWITC -- which operates the race course, will be holding a meeting on January 30 for extending their lease as per the terms decided in the December meeting.

Saraf said the government has not taken any decision on what to do with the land as on date.

"There is no crystallised decision on any amusement park on the land. There is no finality or decision on what use this plot of land would be put to. Amusement park is one of the ideas that is all. How can the government be restrained from even considering ideas?" he asked.

Saraf said the RWITC would have to first take a decision on lease extension and the project in its meeting and send a proposal. The same would then have to go through a procedure of being sent to each of the departments concerned of the state.

Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the BMC, told the court the petitions were speculative in nature. He claimed the petitions were in the nature of a public interest litigation and hence ought to be heard by the bench that is assigned to hear PILs.

The bench then directed the High Court's registry department to place the matters before the HC Chief Justice on the administrative side to seek appropriate order on which bench should hear the pleas.

After the bench passed the order, the petitioners mentioned the same before a division bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor.
CJ Upadhyaya said he would go through the same and pass appropriate orders.

"I will pass an order assigning the matter to a bench," Chief Justice Upadhyaya said.

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever.