SHRIRAM ARUN KOGNOLIKAR AND ANR.versusKOLHAPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THR. ITS COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

2026:BHC-KOL:8503-DB

                                                                                906 pil 99-25.doc


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                               PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 99 OF 2025

               Shriram Arun Kognolikar and Another.                         ...Petitioners.
                       Versus
               Kolhapur Municipal Corporation and Others.                   ...Respondents.
                                           ——————
               Mr. V. Jeevan Vilankar for the Petitioner.
               Mr. Abhijit Adagule and Ms. Ketaki Patil for the Respondent No. 1.
               Ms. Tejas J. Kapre for the Respondent No. 3 and 4.
               Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State.
                                                 ——————
                                                   Coram :     Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
                                                               Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
                                                   Date      : September 3, 2026.
               P. C. :

               1.         In the present PIL petition, the grievance of the Petitioner was as

               regards the illegal felling of trees in the city of Kolhapur and more

               particularly at Gat No.352/B/1/B for the purpose of construction of

               International Convention Centre. The Petitioner came with the

               grievance that Respondent No.3 had approved the budget of Rs.50

               crores for the purpose of construction of International Convention

               Centre, which was thereafter enhanced and without obtaining any

               permission of the Tree Authority, there has been illegal and

               unauthorised cutting of almost 110 trees to which the objections were

               raised and without hearing the Petitioners, the Respondents have

               illegally cut the trees near the project site without any permission.


               Patil-SR                             1 of 4
                                                             906 pil 99-25.doc


2.         From the material which is on record, on 14 th October 2024, the

Government of Maharashtra had approved the project of Kolhapur

International Convention Centre and on 1st August 2025, the

Respondent No. 4, i.e., the Maharashtra Public Works Department had

submitted an application under Section 8(2) of the Maharashtra (Urban

Areas) Preservation of Trees Act, 1975 seeking permission for

transplantation of 110 trees. On 14th August 2025, the Tree Officer

inspected the site and submitted a report under Section 8(3)(a) of the

said Act calling for the re-submission and on 20 th August 2025, the

conditional approval was granted. The joint physical inspection was

conducted by the Tree Authority on 4 th September 2025 and further

documents were called for from the Respondent No. 4 who submitted

the proposal to plant 690 trees. On 16 th September 2025, the public

notice was issued inviting objections and hearing was conducted. The

inspection by the Assistant Garden Superintendent on 15 th October

2025 records that only few trees were partially buried and not 500

trees, as claimed by the Petitioner. A joint meeting was conveyed by the

Collector and Commissioner for hearing the objections on 29 th October

2025 and a detailed communication supported by Google Earth Images

was submitted by the Public Works Department on 31 st October 2025

clarifying that approximately 15 trees were affected. The inspection

was conducted by the Tree Authority to verify the factual position and


Patil-SR                            2 of 4
                                                              906 pil 99-25.doc


report was prepared.         On 24th November 2025, the Tree Authority

Committee meeting finalised the proposal for transplantation, tree

fund deposit, penalty, compensatory plantation, subject to Court orders

and final decision has been kept in abeyance due to pendency of

present PIL. On 2nd January 2026, the final permission was granted by

the Tree Authority.

3.         Despite the permission having been granted, learned Counsel

appearing for the Petitioner would insist that more than 500 trees have

been affected and would seek to rely upon photographs to support the

said claim.

4.         Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would submit that

there should be strict compliance of the permission granted on 2 nd

January 2026, to be regulated by the Corporation and in event, it is

found that there is non compliance of the condition of afforestation,

liberty be reserved to the Petitioner to raise the said issue.

5.         Material on record would indicate that before granting permission

for felling of trees for the purpose of construction of International

Convention Centre, objections were invited from the public and hearing

was held, in which the present Petitioner had participated. The hearing

was for the purpose of determining whether the final permission for

tree felling can be granted by Tree Authority. On 2 nd January 2026, the

final permission has been granted by the Tree Authority, which grants


Patil-SR                            3 of 4
                                                                 906 pil 99-25.doc


permission for felling of 110 trees.           The Tree Authority Committee

meeting held on 24th November 2025 lists out the directions for

compensatory plantation, tree fund deposit, penalty etc. The minutes

of the meeting have to be read along with the final permission granted

on 2nd January 2026 and there is required to be strict compliance of the

afforestation which is a condition for the purpose of granting

permission for felling of trees. As the grievance of the PIL Petitioner

was as regards the illegal felling of trees without securing any

permission, which permission has now been secured on 2 nd January

2026, the PIL petition is disposed of by directing the Respondent-

Corporation to ensure the compliance of conditions subject to which the

permission has been granted for felling of trees. In event it is found

that there is non compliance of the condition as regards afforestation as

contained in the minutes of meeting dated 24 th November 2025, it is

open for the Petitioner to revive the cause.

6.         The PIL petition is disposed of in the above terms.



 [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.]                           [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]




Patil-SR                              4 of 4