LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Supreme Court directs BMC to consider Reliance layout plan for Coastal Road waterfront project

16/06/2026BlogNo Comments

The Supreme Court has cleared the way for the development of a 130-acre public open space along Mumbai’s Coastal Road South project by directing the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to consider the master layout plan submitted by Reliance Industries in accordance with its earlier orders.

The direction effectively removes the remaining uncertainty surrounding the development of the promenade and allied public amenities on the reclaimed seafront land.

The Bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Atul S Chandurkar passed the order while dealing with an application filed by Reliance Industries, which was appointed by the BMC under its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiative to undertake landscaping and maintenance of the reclaimed waterfront area.

Reliance had approached the Supreme Court, contending that approval of its revised master layout plan was being delayed despite its submission to the civic body. The company informed the Court that it had sought in-principle approval from the BMC on May 18 for the modified layout plan. However, the BMC’s Landscaping Committee took the view that prior approval of the Supreme Court was required before any proposal involving commercial or ticketed activities could be processed further.

Taking note of the situation, the Court observed that although the Landscaping Committee had directed that the proposal be placed before the competent authorities, the matter had not progressed due to the perceived requirement of obtaining approval from the Apex Court.

The Bench accordingly directed the BMC to consider the master layout plan without violating the conditions laid down in the Court’s earlier order dated January 12, 2026. The Court noted that the layout plan had already received tentative approval from the civic authorities and required further consideration in accordance with law.

During the proceedings, Reliance informed the Court that the overwhelming majority of the reclaimed land would remain freely accessible to the public. The proposed development includes promenades, gardens, parks, maidans, cycle tracks, jogging tracks and other recreational facilities designed for public use. The company submitted that only a limited portion of the total area would be utilised for iconic attractions that may require payment of entry fees, primarily to meet operational and maintenance expenses.

The Court recorded Reliance’s undertaking that such ticketed attractions would be restricted to a maximum of 15 per cent of the total open space area.

Following the order, civic authorities indicated that the judgment would facilitate the development of ancillary facilities and supporting infrastructure that had remained pending due to the uncertainty surrounding judicial approval. According to BMC officials, the proposed amenities would include facilities requiring only minimal access charges and would complement the larger public open space project.

The 130-acre waterfront stretch has been created as part of the Coastal Road South project and is expected to become one of Mumbai’s largest public seafront recreational spaces. Upon completion, the area will comprise public parks, landscaped gardens, promenades, cycling tracks and other recreational infrastructure along the coastline.

The issue had previously reached the Supreme Court through litigation raising concerns that the reclaimed land could eventually be used for residential or commercial development. In its order dated January 12, 2026, the Court rejected those apprehensions as unfounded and devoid of merit.

The Supreme Court had clarified that strategic development around the Coastal Road project was necessary for beautification and ecological enhancement of the area. At the same time, it categorically prohibited any residential or commercial development for sale or lease on the reclaimed land. The Court had emphasised that the open space must remain accessible to the general public for free use, subject only to measures required for maintaining the project at high standards and ensuring its long-term sustainability.

The Court had further reiterated that no residential or commercial exploitation of the land through sale or lease would be permitted under any circumstances.

Preparatory work for the project has already commenced. Civic officials informed that Reliance has established a nursery at Worli containing approximately 5,000 plants as part of the landscaping preparations. While large-scale plantation work is yet to begin, preliminary activities are underway. Officials stated that plantation work in open spaces near Amarsons and Priyadarshini Park is pending because the required soil and earth-filling work has not yet been completed.

In August 2025, the BMC selected Reliance Industries to undertake landscaping and maintenance of the reclaimed open space under its CSR initiative. The project, valued at approximately Rs 400 crore, envisages maintenance and upkeep of the public space for a period of 30 years. Reliance emerged as the successful bidder among several contenders, including Jindal, Raymond, RPG Foundation and Vedanta, which had also participated in the selection process.

The post Supreme Court directs BMC to consider Reliance layout plan for Coastal Road waterfront project appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court steps in to secure dignity of elderly woman, visually impaired son in Odisha
  • Madras High Court upholds life imprisonment in engineering student murder case; flags growing trend of violence after rejection
  • Supreme Court rejects challenge to unequal tax benefits for wealthy tribal communities
  • Supreme Court refuses to interfere with Madras High Court decision impleading law firm in Chennai metro dispute
  • Supreme Court examines plea against Aadhaar’s use beyond statutory purpose

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.