Conversion permission under East Kolkata Wetlands for environment improvement is a welcome provision for land owners seeking ways to convert their lands.

Conversion Permission under East Kolkata Wetlands

Conversion permission under East Kolkata Wetlands can be a difficult task due to the restrictions imposed therein. The East Kolkata Wetlands (EKW) are a unique urban ecosystem, internationally recognized under the Ramsar Convention as “wetlands of international importance.” Located on the eastern fringes of Kolkata, this sprawling 12,500-hectare area serves as a natural wastewater treatment plant for the city, while also supporting a biodiverse range of flora and fauna, aquaculture-based livelihoods, and flood control. However, increasing urbanization and commercial pressure have led to persistent threats to this fragile environment—most commonly through land conversion under the pretext of “environmental improvement.”

To protect these invaluable ecological assets, the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006 (EKWMA) was enacted. This legislation, along with the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2006, establishes a detailed legal framework for regulating and monitoring land-use changes in the region. A key feature of the law is that no land use change, reclamation, or development activity can be carried out without the explicit permission of the East Kolkata Wetlands Management Authority (EKWMA).

Understanding the Conversion Process: Statutory Safeguards

The process for conversion permission under East Kolkata Wetlands involves multiple layers of scrutiny:

1. Submission of Application: The landowner or developer must submit a formal application detailing the proposed land-use change.
2. Evaluation by EKWMA: The Authority conducts a thorough site inspection and examines whether the proposed change serves the cause of environmental improvement, as required under Section 10(5) of the Act.
3. Referral to District Collector: If the Authority is satisfied with the proposal, it refers the matter to the District Collector for further action under Section 4C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955.
4. Final Decision: After due diligence, the Authority may permit the change—often attaching restrictions or conditions aimed at preserving ecological balance. Importantly, if the proposal involves filling up a water body, the applicant must develop a compensatory water body of equal or larger size elsewhere within the EKW.

The proviso under Rule 5 of the EKWMA Rules, 2006, makes this mandatory, ensuring that water balance is maintained.

Section 10(5) of the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006

Section 10(5) of the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006 plays a crucial role in enforcing the decisions and directions issued by the East Kolkata Wetlands Management Authority (EKWMA). This subsection empowers the Authority with the legal backing to ensure compliance with its mandates. Specifically, Section 10(5) states that any direction issued by the Authority under this Act shall be binding on the person, officer, or authority to whom such direction is issued. This provision strengthens the Authority’s capacity to regulate activities within the notified wetlands, particularly regarding the prevention of illegal encroachments, unauthorized constructions, or land use changes that could harm the ecological integrity of the wetlands. Conversion permission under East Kolkata Wetlands requires an expert property lawyer’s guidance through the multiple legal steps and procedures involved.

The binding nature of these directions ensures that both private individuals and government bodies are legally obligated to adhere to them. It also implies that failure to comply could attract penal consequences under the Act, making Section 10(5) a powerful tool in the administrative and environmental governance of the East Kolkata Wetlands. This provision upholds the principle of command-and-control regulation in environmental law and reflects the state’s duty to preserve ecologically sensitive zones under Article 48A of the Indian Constitution. This makes the conversion permission under East Kolkata Wetlands extremely difficult to obtain. An expert property lawyer can be of extreme importance under such circumstances.

In multiple cases involving real estate and infrastructure development in East Kolkata, such as in the Mallika Das vs. Sri Ankur Sharma & Ors. case, the judiciary has emphasized that Section 10(5) binds all stakeholders to EKWMA’s directions. Developers proceeding without environmental clearance from EKWMA or in violation of its directions (e.g., orders to stop construction or restore encroached land) are considered to be in direct violation of a statutory obligation. Courts have held that such violations not only amount to environmental degradation but also make the projects legally untenable, rendering agreements and approvals invalid under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Landmark Cases on Conversion Permission under East Kolkata Wetlands

1. Mallika Das vs. Sri Ankur Sharma & Ors. (C.O. 627 of 2025)

The complainant, Mallika Das, alleged delay in possession and failure to provide basic infrastructure in a housing project located in an environmentally sensitive zone. Upon examination, the Commission found that the project encroached upon a designated area of the East Kolkata Wetlands, in violation of the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006. The complainant argued that construction was carried out without any clearance from the State Wetland Authority or the Department of Environment.

The Commission ruled the project illegal, emphasizing that the construction violated not only the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Sections 2(1)(g) and 2(1)(r)) but also environmental laws. The absence of approval under the EKWMA invalidated the building plan, which in turn nullified the basis for executing a sale agreement. The judgment quoted Section 3 of EKWMA, which prohibits any reclamation or change of land use in notified wetland areas. The Commission ordered full refund, damages under Section 14(1)(d), and directed the authorities to initiate environmental action under EKWMA and allied rules.

2. Splendour Commercial Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.– Vs- East Kolkata Wetlands Management Authority & Ors. (M.A.T.1122 of 2013 and C.A.N.7606 of 2013)

In this case, the complainant challenged Splendour Commodities Pvt. Ltd. for not delivering the promised residential property and failing to meet contractual obligations. The allegations included delay in possession, false assurances regarding project approvals, and inadequate infrastructure development. A critical aspect of the complaint was that the project was allegedly located within the East Kolkata Wetlands, raising concerns under the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006. It was highlighted that the project did not have proper environmental clearances as required under Rule 5 of the EKWMA and was violating land use restrictions imposed under the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017.

The Commission acknowledged that the construction fell within the notified East Kolkata Wetlands area, violating EKWMA provisions. This illegality contributed to the finding of deficiency in service under Section 2(11) and unfair trade practices under Section 2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The lack of proper environmental clearance not only made the project illegal but also rendered the sale agreement null and void due to its contravention of public policy under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Commission ordered full refund with interest, compensation under Section 39(1)(d), and litigation cost under Section 39(1)(e), citing both environmental law violations and consumer law breaches.

3. Path Finder Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. EKWMA (CTO/EN/ 210/368/2013-14)

This case pertained to alleged educational fraud where the complainant claimed that promised facilities were not provided. The institution was located near sensitive ecological zones in East Kolkata. Though no direct construction in wetlands was alleged, the complainant noted concerns about lack of sanctioned land use for institutional purposes, potentially breaching norms under the East Kolkata Wetlands regulations.

The Commission addressed the case mainly under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, finding a deficiency in service under Section 2(11) and an unfair trade practice under Section 2(47). While the institution was ordered to refund fees and pay compensation, the Commission also recommended that the local development authority scrutinize whether the institution had violated land use norms or environmental regulations, including the EKWMA, 2006. However, no conclusive finding on EKW violation was made due to lack of documentary evidence.

4. Vishal Water World vs. EKWMA (No. CTO/ EN/ 104/ 385/ 2014-2015)

This case involved complaints about Vishal Water World, which failed to deliver a safe and hygienic experience to visitors. While the primary issue was related to service quality, it was observed that the amusement park was located in the East Kolkata periphery. The complainant brought to notice that the facility encroached upon areas suspected to be part of the East Kolkata Wetlands. Though not central to the complaint, this raised concerns about environmental compliance.

This case involved complaints about Vishal Water World, which failed to deliver a safe and hygienic experience to visitors. While the primary issue was related to service quality, it was observed that the amusement park was located in the East Kolkata periphery. The complainant brought to notice that the facility encroached upon areas suspected to be part of the East Kolkata Wetlands. Though not central to the complaint, this raised concerns about environmental compliance.

Environmental Improvement: Loophole or Legitimate Clause?

A rising concern is the misuse of the “improvement of environment” clause under Section 10(5) by developers seeking to construct high-rises, malls, or commercial hubs within EKW. As highlighted in articles such as “East Kolkata Wetlands and Provisions for Conversion of Land”, developers often mask commercial intent by claiming their projects offer green infrastructure, parks, or water management facilities.

However, courts and the EKWMA have maintained that true environmental improvement involves restoration, conservation, and community benefit—not real estate expansion. Misrepresentation can be challenged under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, and invite criminal prosecution. You can also learn more about EKWMA action plans to be aware of the policies therein.

High Court Oversight and Recent Developments

In 2024, the Calcutta High Court passed a significant order restraining the EKWMA and other planning agencies from granting permissions for new constructions within the EKW without judicial oversight. This move came in response to numerous PILs highlighting blatant violations in areas like Bantala, Chowbaga, and Dhapa. The court emphasized that compensatory water bodies must be scientifically designed and monitored, and permissions must be environmentally justified, not economically motivated. Conversion permission under East Kolkata wetlands should only be allowed under exceptional circumstances.

Conversion Permission and the Way Forward

The East Kolkata Wetlands are not just an ecological wonder—they are a functional necessity for Kolkata’s survival. In an era of climate instability, their role in water regulation, pollution control, and biodiversity preservation cannot be overstated. The EKWMA Act, 2006, particularly Section 10(5), provides a clear legal path to regulate land conversion with environmental integrity.

Conversion permissions must be the exception—not the rule—and granted only when the environmental benefit is evident, measurable, and irreversible. With judicial vigilance and stronger public awareness, the misuse of these provisions can be curbed, and the EKW can continue to thrive as a model of sustainable urban ecology.