Not all 100-page judgments are well-considered: Chief Justice Dipankar Datta of Bombay High Court

Not all 100-page judgements are well-considered, Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court Dipankar Datta said on Thursday, to highlight how the length of a judgment did not imply that it considered all issues and aspects of a case..The off-the-cuff remark came in response to a submission of Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni who pointed out that the issue in a petition which was being heard by the Bench had already been considered by a co-ordinate bench in a long judgment..The Bench, also including Justice MS Karnik, was hearing a 2019 public interest litigation (PIL) by a city-based NGO which sought to declare the Aarey Colony forests as a 'conservation reserve' as per Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act..The plea had been filed in response to a decision of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) allowing the felling of over 2,600 trees in the suburban green zone for construction of a car shed for the Mumbai Metro Rail Project. During the hearing, the AG pointed out that two co-ordinate benches of the High Court had in 2018 and 2019 settled the issue of using land in the Aarey Colony of Mumbai for the project. In 2018, a Division Bench had, in a 100-page judgment, dismissed the challenge to the decision of the State earmarking 33 acres of land of the Development Plan for the car shed project. In 2019, another Division Bench refused to declare Aarey a protected or reserved forest and also refused to set aside the decision of BMC. The AG stated that these decisions had been appealed before the Supreme Court, along with connected petitions seeking similar relief, and were likely to be heard on July 29. In view of these developments, he requested the Court to adjourn the hearing by 2 weeks. While the Bench granted the adjournment, CJ Datta pointed out that just because a judgment is lengthy, it would not mean that all issues arising in that particular case had been considered. The AG immediately quipped that his intention was to only bring the judgment to the Court's attention for its consideration..The Supreme Court had on October 7, 2019 ordered the State of Maharashtra not to cut any further trees in Aarey and to maintain status quo.The matter had reached the Supreme Court after the Bombay High Court had dismissed pleas challenging the removal of trees in Aarey, and thereafter refused to entertain an urgent request to stay the tree removal.This had prompted a student delegation to write a letter to then Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi to intervene in the matter. Treating the letter as a petition, a Special Bench was constituted to hear the matter, which had then directed status quo.The top court had also clarified later that there was no stay on the construction of the contentious metro car shed project, and the status quo pertained only to further felling of trees.Subsequently, after the Uddhav Thackeray-led coalition government came to power in Maharashtra in 2019, nearly 800 acres of the Aarey area was declared as a reserved forest and the State decided to develop the car shed at Kanjurmarg instead.But with the recent fall of the Thackeray government, one of the first decisions taken by the new Eknath Shinde-led government which took charge on June 30, was to recommence work at Aarey, one of Mumbai's major green lungs.