It is entirely in order that the Bombay High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Lonavala Khandala Citizens Forum and Anr vs The Municipal Council of Lonavala and Ors in Public Interest Litigation No. 93 of 2007 With Connected Matters and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2025:BHC-AS:30822-DB that was initially reserved on 17 July, 2025 and then was finally pronounced on 23 July, 2025 in the exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction while taking serious note of the increasing environmental strain due to uncontrolled most rapid construction in Lonavala and Khandala has issued a slew of most commendable directions to improve the civic infrastructure and so also rein in unregulated construction in the Lonavala-Khandala hill stations which are a very popular tourist destination just near Pune in Maharashtra which constitute the backbone of this robust judgment. It would be in the fitness of things to note that a Bench of Bombay High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Hon’ble Mr Justice Sandeep Marne directed the Maharashtra Government and so also the Lonavala Municipal Council to prepare a new development plan along with updated Development Control Rules to curb uncontrolled construction.
At the very outset, this progressive, pragmatic, persuasive and pertinent judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice Sandeep Marne for a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and himself sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “For several years, the twin hill station of Lonavala-Khandala has been the most popular weekend getaway for residents of Mumbai and Pune, who look for quick breaks from the city chaos. Tucked away in Sahyadri Range, this twin hill stations- just 5 kms apartattracts lakhs of tourists every year. During monsoon season, the region turns into misty paradise of waterfalls, cloud covered roads and lush green trails. However, this weekend paradise is fast losing its charm due to rapid urbanization and tourism. As the weekend getaway became more and more popular, with the number of tourists on a given monsoon weekend crossing two lakh, garbage heaps and blocked drainages became regular feature of the otherwise scenic paradise, which started getting marred by uncontrolled constructions and lack of basic civic amenities. This PIL Petition seeks to highlight the plight of the local residents of Lonavala-Khandala Region and is aimed at improving the civic amenities and regulating the construction activities in the region.”
To put things in perspective, the Division Bench envisages in para 2 disclosing that, “The Lonavala-Khandala Citizens Forum is an organisation formed by the residents of Lonavala-Khandala towns. The region of Lonavala-Khandala is a part of ecologically sensitive Western Ghats and used to receive annual rainfall of about 200 to 300 inches. The region has five dams and five lakes, numerous springs, waterfalls and ponds. The rivers Indrayani and Ulhas owe their origins to Lonavala-Khandala region. The hills around the twin hill stations are green and forested and provide catchments for the lakes and rivers. In addition to the local population, several residents of Mumbai and Pune own their villas, bungalows and houses in Lonavala-Khandala region. The petition filed pro bono publico seeks to highlight the uncontrolled development activities occurring in Lonavala-Khandala region putting huge strain on infrastructural facilities like water supply, sewerage, solid waste management, roads, traffic etc. The association of residents has filed the present petition in the year 2007 seeking directions of this Court to regulate the construction activities, for demolition of illegal constructions and for augmentation of the infrastructure facilities in the region. The proactive citizens of Lonavala-Khandala region, who face civil problems, seek accountability from the civic officials and government departments complaining that they have abandoned duties of proper civic governance, which is in violation of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which includes Right to Clean and Healthy Environment.”
As we see, the Division Bench then points out in para 3 that, “Municipal Council of Lonavala has been constituted under the provisions of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (the Municipal Councils Act) which is the second Respondent to the petition. The administrative control over the Municipal Council is exercised by the Directorate of Municipal Administration. The Municipal Council is entrusted with the duties of looking after civic administration and regulate the development activities. In addition to the Municipal Council of Lonavala being responsible for the civic facilities in the town of Lonavala, the Collector, Pune District is also responsible for maintaining and providing the necessary infrastructure facilities in the charming hill station of Lonavala-Khandala region. Petitioners complain that the favourite weekend getaway for Mumbaikars and Punekars is marred by crumbling infrastructure and suffers from problem of bad roads, flooding, vehicular pollution, felling of trees, unauthorized constructions, garbage management, lack of adequate drinking water etc.”
Briefly stated, the Division Bench states in para 4 that, “The Lonavala-Khandala region comprises of approximately of an area of 120 sq.kms. At the time, when the petition was filed the region had population of 60,000 to 70,000. The region is located at a distance of 65 kms from Pune and about 100 kms from Mumbai. It is located at an altitude of about 2,800 ft above the sea level. On account of proximity from metropolitan cities of Mumbai and Pune, the region has become a popular weekend getaway for Mumbaikar and Punekars. At one point of time, Lonavala and Khandala were charming hill stations and according to the Petitioner, lack of apathy by the Respondents has resulted in loss of charm of the twin hill stations of Lonavala-Khandala. During weekends, the region is visited by approximately 10,000 cars and sometimes the total number of visitors during the weekends in monsoon season exceed 2,00,000. Petitioners believe that the Respondent-Authorities have failed to take effective steps to conserve the ecological balance of the region.”
It would be instructive to note that the Division Bench hastens to add in para 24 noting that, “It is thus a statutory duty of the Municipal Council to provide for facilities of water supply, sewerage, drainage, roads, solid waste management etc. The Municipal Council is therefore bound to make a provision for requisite infrastructure for the region. This Court has already passed interim orders from time-to-time mandating provision of requisite infrastructure in the region. The Municipal Council has also been directed to implement Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 which again are binding on the Municipal Council. We therefore trust and hope that Lonavala-Khandala Municipal Council shall discharge its statutory obligations by making available requisite infrastructure in the region.”
It is also worth noting that the Division Bench notes in para 33 that, “Since Lonavala Municipal Council is in the process of preparation of new development plan, in our view, the existing mechanism of processing of development proposals through Court appointed Expert Committee can continue to operate till the new development plan and the new Development Control Regulations are sanctioned by the State Government. This would ensure that an uncontrolled development based on existing dated DCRs does not occur during the gap period.”
Most significantly and so also most remarkably, the Division Bench encapsulates in para 34 what constitutes the cornerstone and backbone of this notable judgment postulating precisely that, “In the light of the above discussion, we proceed to pass the following order :-
(i) Lonavala Municipal Council and the State Government shall take prompt steps to augment and improve the infrastructural facilities in the Lonavala-Khandala region relating to provision of water supply, solid waste management, sewerage, storm water drainage system, maintenance, repairs and widening of roads, etc.
(ii) Lonavala Municipal Council shall take action against unauthorized constructions within its jurisdiction in accordance with law both by identifying such constructions, as well as by acting on complaints received on Grievance Redressal Mechanism created vide order dated 27 October 2016.
(iii) Lonavala Municipal Council shall give wide publicity to the Grievance Redressal Mechanism by publishing the same once every quarter in local newspapers having wide circulation.
(iv) Lonavala Municipal Council and the State Government shall take prompt steps in preparing new development plan applicable to the jurisdiction of a Municipal Council and formulate a fresh set of Development Control Regulations. While doing so, the Municipal Council and the State Government shall ensure that the new constructions in the region are carried out strictly commensurate to the infrastructural facilities.
(v) It would also be open to the State Government to consider inclusion of Lonavala-Khandala region in list of hill stations for the purpose of applicability of Special Regulations. The Petitioner would be at liberty to make a representation to the State Government for that purpose.
(vi) Until finalization of new development plan for Lonavala Municipal Council, the existing mechanism created vide order dated 29 April 2014 further modified vide order dated 14 August 2014 of seeking opinion of the Expert Committee shall continue to operate.
(vii) The Expert Committee shall stand dissolved on the date of finalization of the new development plan and formulation of new Development Control Regulations.”
In addition, it would be worthwhile to note that the Division Bench directs in para 35 holding succinctly that, “With the above directions, the PIL petition is disposed of.”
Finally, the Division Bench then draws the curtains of this notable judgment by directing and holding aptly in para 36 that, “With disposal of the main Petition nothing would survive in the Contempt Petition and Interim Applications and the same are accordingly disposed of. Writ Petition No. 3840 of 2009 does not survive in view of disposal of the PIL No. 93 of 2007 and the same is also disposed of.”
Sanjeev Sirohi,