Maharashtra Govt Seeking To Shield 'Big Mandals' Through PoP Idols Immersion Policy: PIL Petitioner Tells Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court was on Friday (July 17) told that the Maharashtra Government was trying to protect 'big mandals' by pressing for allowing immersion of Ganesh idols made of Plaster of Paris (PoP) above the height of six feet, in natural water bodies. 

A division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata has been hearing final arguments in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by activist Rohit Joshi, who has sought a total ban on immersion of PoP idols in natural bodies, irrespective of their height. 

Notably, the Maharashtra Government had last year, formulated a policy, wherein it had decided to immerse PoP made idols which are below six feet, into artificial ponds and idols above six feet, were permitted to be immersed in natural water bodies. This policy, which was extended up till March 2026 in view of the Maghi Ganesh celebrations, also provided for removing of the PoP idols from the natural water bodies, on the subsequent day of their immersion. 

Senior Advocate Mihir Desai representing Joshi told the judges on Friday that the State, which has been urging the court to let it continue with its 2025 policy even for this year, was only trying to protect big mandals.

"It is their stance... it seems that they want to protect the big mandals and thus they are wanting to allow use of PoP for making idols even for this year," Desai submitted. 

Further Desai referred to several orders passed by various benches of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), holding that the guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) with regards to ban on immersion of PoP idols in natural water bodies, were 'binding' and 'statutory.'

The senior advocate also referred to the orders passed by the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court and the Telangana High Court on the very issue and submitted that the said High Courts too have held that these guidelines of the CPCB were 'binding' yet the CPCB has now in a volte face, maintained that their guidelines were only 'advisory.'

Further referring to the 'trans-generational equity in Indian environmental jurisprudence', Desai urged that while passing judgment in the instant case, the court must keep in mind— what we, as this generation, would be passing on or giving to the future generations as natural resources. 

"We must look not only for our generation but we need to look for the coming and future generations too. As to what we will be giving them in the form of natural resources," Desai submitted.

The arguments are going to continue on Monday (July 21) afternoon.

Case Title: Rohit Manohar Joshi vs State of Maharashtra (PIL/96/2024)