Nagpur: The decades-old dispute over the ecological and legal status of Nagpur’s iconic Futala Lake entered its final stage on Monday, with the Supreme Court reserving its judgment after a day-long hearing. At stake is whether Futala qualifies as a wetland and whether recent redevelopment works have violated environmental safeguards.
The petition, filed by Swacch Association, Nagpur, has challenged a series of projects at the lake, including a floating laser show, musical fountain, and a steel banyan tree installation for projection, arguing that these amount to intrusive, permanent constructions that threaten the lake’s natural ecology.
Gold Rate
18 Aug 2025
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Bhushan Gavai, with Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria, heard arguments from both sides.
The Nagpur Metropolitan Region Development Authority (NMRDA), backed by the Nagpur Collectorate, maintained that Futala is historically a “tank” built during the Bhonsle era for irrigation and water storage, and is not listed as a wetland under the 2017 Wetlands Rules. Counsel for MahaMetro, which executed much of the redevelopment, produced reports from VNIT Nagpur claiming the banyan tree is a floating structure anchored by chains and removable, not a permanent construction.
In contrast, the petitioners argued that Futala figures in central wetland inventories and supports biodiversity, qualifying it for protection. They accused authorities of “greenwashing” by projecting the banyan tree as an aesthetic feature, while in reality disturbing the lake bed and obstructing the natural catchment area.
Chief Justice Gavai, recalling personal visits to the site, observed that the catchment lay behind the lake, while the contested structures were placed on the front side, where facilities already existed.
After extensive submissions, the bench reserved its judgment, which is expected to clarify not just the legal classification of Futala, wetland or man-made tank, but also set a precedent on whether such anchored, floating structures are permissible under environmental law.
For now, the lake continues to serve its traditional role, supplying irrigation water to Telankhedi Garden, while awaiting a ruling that could redefine its future as both a heritage landmark and a civic resource.
