The 1st petitioner is the Upputhara Grama Panchayat. The 2nd petitioner is the President and the 3rd petitioner is a member of that Grama Panchayat. This Panchayat has three authorised kadavus, as defined in Section 2(e) of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001(herein after referred to as 'the Act'). Regarding yet another kadavu, the matter is pending consideration before this Court.

2. The complaint of the Grama Panchayat is that there is large scale unauthorised mining of sand from Thapasi kadavu, which is one among the kadavus of the Panchayat. It has pleaded that it has material even in the form of video clippings to that effect. The specific allegation is about the operations of the sand mafia. The Panchayat is unable to control the situation and seeks orders for the intervention of the District Collector, Idukki, the Superintendents of Police and different police officers under his command. The Director of Panchayat Is also made a party to this Writ Petition.

3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. The Act in hand was enacted to protect the river banks and river beds from large scale dredging of river sand and to protect their bio-physical environmental system and regulate the removal of river sand and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. This legislation was preceded by a notification issued in June, 1993, which dealt with the management of different rivers. The Act was brought into force because it had come to the notice of the Government that there is indiscriminate and uncontrolled removal of sand from rivers cause large scale river bank sliding and loss of property; large scale dredging of river sand disturb the bio-physical environmental system of the river in different degrees. It was found that in public interest it is expedient to provide regulatory measures for the protection of river banks and removal of sand from rivers. The Act was intended to take care also of complaints regarding hardship to the employees engaged in construction work due to the executive regulatory orders, which were in force before the Act. Thus, this piece of legislation, ultimately, aim at preserving the environment and applying the principle of sustainable development, balancing the needs of the society to have river sand for different activities. It also takes care of the need of the labour force, which may include even those who are involved in mining river sand. The Act is intended to be operationalised with a long term strategy to provide sustained management of the water bodies, bereft of which, the future generations would be in peril, about which, there can be no doubt.

5. Sustainable development, when sought to be brought up in a regulated manner, unregulated hounding of the natural resources, not only deprives the environment, but also defeats the constitutional goals in terms of the directive principles of State policy, apart from the concept of right to live, including right to potable water etc., generated by judicial precedents relatable to Article 21 and also Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The fundamental duties of a citizen enlisted in Article 51A of the Constitution of India enjoins that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India, among other things, to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures. Compassion is a mental element. It is said to flow from the heart- not, the biological one. One may or may not have it. But, no one can conduct himself, in any manner and annihilating the promotion, protection and improvement of the natural environment. The moment he steps to do that, he is in conflict with the Constitution. In my view, he would not be able even to seek different remedies in law, unless, he, if challenged, shows that he abides by the Constitution.

6. The Land Revenue Department under the