Fishermen whose livelihood will be impacted by the proposed Mumbai coastal road and the Bandra-Versova sea link (BVSL) projects are unlikely to get any compensation, unlike those impacted by the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL) project, who received a one-time compensation of Rs 5,68,000 per family. Fishermen whose livelihood will be impacted by the proposed Mumbai coastal road and the Bandra-Versova sea link (BVSL) projects are unlikely to get any compensation, unlike those impacted by the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL) project, who received a one-time compensation of Rs 5,68,000 per family. What’s more, their only recourse for appeal to protect their interests has received a setback due to the scarcity of judicial staff to hear their plea. In the case of MTHL, the compensation was mandated by the funding agency for the project, the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA). However, the coastal road and the BVSL projects are being funded entirely by implementing agencies in India the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC). Sudip Mullick, partner, and Jhinook Roy, senior associate, with legal firm Khaitan & Co, say there is no legislation in India that provides for compensation for infrastructure projects not involving land acquisition, but adversely affecting the livelihood of persons. Under the Land Acquisition Act 2013, only those whose land is acquired by the government, (whether or not they are land owners), and who are affected by the acquisition, are entitled to receive compensation. However, there are some guidelines for cases where a person’s livelihood may also be affected. Mullick said, One of the guidelines is for payment of compensation towards damages (under the Electricity Act, 2003), with regard to right of way (RoW) for transmission lines issued by the power ministry. This specifically provides for compensation towards diminution of land value underneath the strung conductor between two transmission towers, even when no land acquisition is involved. The other guideline, and one that is more relevant to the coastal road and BVSL projects, is the Coastal Regulatory Zone (CRZ) notification dated January 6, 2011, notified by the ministry of environment, forests and climate change (MoEFCC) (under the Environment Protection Act 1986), to ensure livelihood security to fisher communities living in coastal areas. According to Mullick, while the CRZ notification does not directly deal with compensation, a provision of public hearing has been provided during which the affected fishermen communities can raise their objections. Mullick said, The MoEFCC may, under a specific or general order, specify projects which require prior public hearing of project-affected people. Usually, the CRZ clearances for the projects require the project proponent to address issues raised during the public hearings. Fishermen and environmental groups have filed a petition against the BVSL with the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which has ruled in favour of the fishermen in some earlier cases. However, the closest NGT from Mumbai is the one in Pune, which has been without a judge since December 2017, following the retirement of Justice Swatanter Kumar. In fact, NGT’s functioning has been affected by vacancies over the past few years. After the retirement of Justice Kumar, a Central government notification appointed Justice Umesh Dattatraya Salvi, who had been serving at the Pune bench of the NGT, as the acting chairperson of the principal bench of NGT at New Delhi. With this, the green court is left with less than one-third of its sanctioned strength of 20 officials. Asim Sarode, one of the lawyers representing the fishing community affected by the proposed projects, told FE, The cases are pending before the NGT with no judge available to hear these cases. A judge who has been appointed from Karnataka is reluctant to travel to Pune to hear the cases on a regular basis.