The National Green Tribunal (NGT) bench of Judicial Member Dinesh Kumar Singh and Expert Member Vijay Kulkarni has directed social activist Santosh Daundkar to submit evidence supporting his allegations of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) violations by actor Shah Rukh Khan or the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) in securing CRZ clearance for the renovation of Shah Rukh Khan’s iconic Bandra residence, Mannat.

"If any violation of the above procedure has been committed by the Project Proponent or the MCZMA, the same may be submitted by the appellant specifically along with the evidence in support of that, within four weeks, failing which we would be left with no option but to dismiss the present appeal for non-compliance of the order of this Tribunal, at the stage of admission itself." the bench stated.

The appeal, filed by Daundkar, seeks to quash the CRZ Clearance dated 3rd January, 2025, issued by the MCZMA (Respondent No.3). The appellant has alleged multiple violations by Shah Rukh Khan, claiming a consistent pattern of non-compliance with CRZ regulations. Among the primary allegations is that the actor has a history of CRZ violations that were not addressed before granting new clearance.

Daundkar also claims that two heritage structures were demolished without obtaining prior Environment Clearance from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) (Respondent No.1). Additionally, the appellant contends that the plot was originally reserved for an Art Gallery under the statutory Development Plan, but this reservation was removed without mandatory approval from the MCZMA.

Further, the appellant alleges that a Ground + 6 storied building was constructed without MCZMA’s permission and that the necessary Environment Clearance from the MoEF&CC was not obtained, despite the project cost exceeding Rs. 5 crores. Another key allegation involves the illegal excavation of a 6-metre-deep basement, which reportedly led to the extraction of minor minerals and groundwater activities expressly prohibited under CRZ regulations.

Daundkar also asserts that twelve 1-BHK flats initially designated for mass housing were merged into a super-luxury residence, in violation of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Additionally, he claims that the construction occurred in a CRZ-I designated ‘Heritage Area,’ where such activities were prohibited under the CRZ Notification of 1991. Lastly, it was alleged that Khan, identified as an artist in this context, illegally facilitated the removal of the Art Gallery reservation.

After considering the arguments, the Tribunal observed that the grounds raised by the appellant might not be relevant, “because whatever actions have been taken by the Project Proponent, were taken long back between the year 2000 to 2006. But it is also true that the CRZ recommendation, which has been impugned herein, is obtained in the year 2025 i.e. on 03.01.2025.”

The Tribunal also acknowledged that the appeal was filed within the 30-day limitation period but noted that the CRZ Clearance appeared to comply with Clause No.8 of the CRZ Notification, 2019.

“If any violation of the above procedure has been committed by the Project Proponent or the MCZMA, the same may be submitted by the appellant specifically along-with the evidence in support of that, within four weeks, failing which we would be left with no option but to dismiss the present appeal for non-compliance of the order of this Tribunal, at the stage of admission itself.” ordered the Tribunal.

The matter has been scheduled for admission on 23rd April, 2025.

Case Details: Santosh Daudkar Vs. The secretary, MoEF&CC & Ors. Appeal No.21/2025(WZ)

Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Aditya Pratap