On 9 February 2017, the Bombay High Court issued an interim order prohibiting the MMRDA from cutting trees for the project. The Court was hearing two PILs filed by Mina Verma and Pravin Jehangir. Verma's PIL concerned tree felling in Churchgate, Colaba and Cuffe Parade, and Jehangir challenged the use of public lands for construction of the line. On 10 March 2017, the Court ordered the MMRC to furnish documents proving that it had received necessary clearance from the MoEF to construct the proposed stations of Hutatma Chowk, Churchgate and Cuffe Parade, or documents to prove that no clearances were required. The order was in response to the petitioner's claim that the MoEF had rejected the MMRC's request to construct the 3 stations. The MMRC responded that no clearance was required to construct the stations. On 16 March, the Court issued a notice to the MoEF asking it to clarify whether it had granted clearance to the MMRC to construct nine stations. The petitioner had pointed out that all nine stations fell under the Coastal Regulatory Zones II and III. On 12 April, the MMRDA filed its reply to petition declaring that the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SIEAA) had granted it permission to construct stations in Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) areas. The court directed the MMRDA and MMRC to submit all relevant supporting documents by 24 April. On 3 May, the Bombay High Court declared that the metro was crucial to ease traffic congestion in Mumbai. However, the court reserved its stay on tree felling stating that it would consider "what is more important - life of a human being or the life of tree". On 5 May, the High Court vacated its stay on tree felling for Metro 3. The Court declared that Metro 3 would help improve the environment and the socio-economic conditions of the city. It also observed that a balance had to be found between environmental protection and development, and that taking a "harsh stand, which the petitioners want" would make it "impossible to conduct development work".
