In a significant order safeguarding public spaces in Mumbai, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that the reclaimed land along the Mumbai Coastal Road (South), which has been handed over to Reliance Industries for landscaping and development, must "ordinarily remain open to the public."
The Division Bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar clarified that corporate involvement in developing public infrastructure through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) should not lead to the privatization or commercialization of public commons.
The issue reached the Supreme Court via a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Jipnesh Narendra Jain. The petitioner challenged the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation's (BMC) decision to issue an Expression of Interest (EoI) inviting private agencies to develop and maintain the green spaces and promenade along the newly reclaimed Coastal Road.
The contract was awarded to Reliance Industries/Reliance Foundation. The petitioner raised several apprehensions:
- Commercialization: Fears that a private corporate entity might monetize the space or restrict entry.
- Privatization of Commons: The argument that "coastal commons" should be maintained by public authorities like the BMC, not private conglomerates.
- Exclusion: Concerns that ordinary citizens might be barred from accessing the promenade if it is treated as private property.
While hearing the plea, the Bench remarked that the petitioner’s fears were largely addressed by the Court's previous order from September 2022. That order explicitly stated:
"The land reclaimed should not be utilised for any residential or commercial development/purposes, presently or at any time in the future."
However, to set all doubts to rest, the Court issued a fresh clarification regarding Reliance's role:
- Mandatory Public Access: The Court directed that the Dharmaveer Swarajyarakshak Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj Mumbai Coastal Road (South) area must remain open for public use.
- Limited Restrictions: Access can only be restricted in specific areas where "extra developments" or "maintenance work" are actively being undertaken.
- Role of Reliance: The corporate entity is acting merely as a developer under CSR instructions from the Corporation. They do not own the land and cannot treat it as a private asset.
Justice Maheshwari interestingly remarked to the petitioner's counsel, "You are against public interest... this is a new project... At least Bombay people should have some [open space]." This signaled the Court's view that delaying public amenities in the name of procedural purity (open tenders vs. CSR) was not beneficial to the city.
This judgment strikes a balance between public-private partnerships (PPP) in urban development and the Right to the City.
- It allows the BMC to leverage private funds (CSR) to create world-class infrastructure without burdening the exchequer.
- Simultaneously, it creates a judicial firewall against the "VIP culture" or privatization of these spaces, ensuring that the Mumbai Coastal Road remains a promenade for the Aam Aadmi (common man), not just a view for the elite.