IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Nitin Jamdar, C.J., S.Manu, J.
Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority – Petitioner
Versus
P.M.Sukhilesh And Ors. – Respondents
WA NO. 212 OF 2021, WA NO. 513 OF 2021
Decided On : 07-01-2025
(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Sections 3(1) and 3(2) - Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Construction of crematorium in CRZ I area - Permission quashed due to ecological sensitivity of mangrove forest - The court emphasized the need for strict adherence to environmental protections under the Coastal Regulation Zone notifications. (Paras 14, 29)
(B) Public Interest Litigation - Locus Standi - The court discussed the standing of the Petitioner, asserting that residents can challenge permissions affecting their environment, emphasizing the importance of public interest in environmental matters. (Paras 20, 21)
Facts of the case:
The Dharmadam Grama Panchayat sought to construct a crematorium on land classified as CRZ I, despite repeated denials from the CRZ Authority due to ecological concerns about mangroves present on the site.
Findings of Court:
The permissions granted by the CRZ Authority were quashed as they conflicted with environmental regulations protecting CRZ I areas, which prohibit construction activities. The court affirmed the need for rigorous environmental safeguards. (Paras 27, 29)
Issues: The main issues included whether the land fell under CRZ I and if the CRZ Authority acted within its mandate when granting permissions for construction. (Paras 19, 29)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that construction in CRZ I is impermissible due to its ecological significance, emphasizing that environmental protection laws take precedence over local developmental interests. (Paras 28, 29)
Result: Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Nitin Jamdar, C. J.
The learned Single Judge, by the judgment dated 12 November 2020, quashed the permission granted by the Coastal Regulation Zone Authority to the Dharmadam Grama Panchayat to construct a public crematorium in a mangrove area. Despite the site lying in dense mangroves, Dharmadam Grama Panchayat has made a series of attempts to use it for a public crematorium. These Appeals filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act are an extension of the same effort, now joined by the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority.
2. Twenty cents of wetland in Re-Survey No. 4/3A in Dharmadam Village, Kannur District, contains a mangrove forest and falls under the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) due to its ecologically sensitive and geomorphological characteristics. This land is owned by the Dharmadam Grama Panchayat. The Panchayat intends to construct a crematorium on the aforementioned land. For this purpose, it seeks to reclaim the land. Petitioner’s case is that the Panchayat is proceeding to do so despite the prohibitions under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (Act of 2008), and the Coastal Regulation Zone Notifications issued by the Government of India under the Environment Protection Act, 1986 (Act of 1986).
3. To contextualize the question raised in the petition, a brief reference to the statutory provisions is necessary. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, was enacted to protect and improve the environment and related matters. Section 3 grants the Central Government wide powers to take measures deemed necessary or expedient for environmental protection. Section 3(2) further empowers the Central Government to include specific measures for environmental protection, including those related to coastal zones. Under Sections 3(1) and 3(2)(v) of the Act of 1986, the Central Government issued a notification regulating activities in the coastal zone stretches, known as the Coastal Zone Regulation (CRZ). On 27 September 1996, the Coastal Zone Management Plan under the CRZ notification was approved and published. Subsequently, on 6 January 2011, the Central Government issued the CRZ Notification of 2011, superseding the 1991 notification. The Coastal Zone Management Plan under the CRZ Notification 2011 came into force on 28 February 2019.
4. The CRZ notification classifies the Coastal Regulation Zones in different areas. CRZ – I is environmentally most critical and is subclassified as CRZ – IA, which constitutes ecologically sensitive areas and geomorphological features which play a role in the integrity of the coasts such as mangroves, coral reefs, sand dunes etc. The CRZ–IB lists intertidal zones. CRZ – II constitutes developed areas up to or close to the shoreline within the existing Municipal limits. CRZ – III are lands which are relatively undisturbed, and those do not fall under CRZ – I or II. CRZ – III is further classified into CRZ – A and CRZ – B. Coastal Regulation Zone notification prohibits certain activities within the CRZ. As regards CRZ IA, these areas are ecologically most sensitive and generally no activities are permitted in CRZ – IA except for certain exceptions. CRZ-AB lays down activities that are regulated and permissible. CRZ–III has fewer restrictions than the other CRZ–I and permits construction for various purposes, including a crematorium.
5. The District Collector, Kannur issued an order on 4 November 2011 stating that the subject land is a wetland and that filling it would be illegal. The Panchayat was directed to restore the land to its original condition. On 19 July 2013, the Secretary of the Panchayat submitted an application to the Coastal Regulation Zone Authority (the CRZ Authority) for the construction of a graveyard on the site. The proposal was discussed at the 68th meeting of the CRZ Authority on 15 December 2014, and the Authority decided to decline the construction as it fell under the category of CRZ I. This order was conveyed to the Panchayat on 19
Divine Retreat Centre v. State of Kerala and Others
Usman Gani J. Khatri v. Cantonment Board
Howrah Municipal Corporation v. Ganges Rope Co.Ltd. (2004) 1 SCC 663
Construction in ecologically sensitive CRZ I areas is prohibited, reaffirming the precedence of environmental protection laws over local development interests.
A permit for construction cannot be denied based solely on distance regulations if prior approvals were given without compliance to newer guidelines, highlighting the importance of proper land classi....
The court ruled that challenges to environmental clearances necessitate factual inquiry beyond Article 226, allowing petitioners to seek remedies under the National Green Tribunal Act.
The construction of public utility jetties in CRZ-I areas is permissible without mangrove destruction, aligning with sustainable development principles.
Local authorities are empowered to process building permit applications for individual self-dwelling units up to 300 square meters under CRZ II category as per clause 7(vi) of the CRZ Notification, 2....
Constructions in ecologically sensitive CRZ-I and on seaward side of roads in CRZ-II are prohibited; even temporary structures on concrete bases illegal, mandating demolition and restoration to prote....
Point of law: Basis of categorisation of projects and activities under the EIA notification lies in the expanse of the built-up area of the proposed project.
A previous NGT decision affirmatively stated that land inhabited by slum dwellers cannot be legally categorized as a Garden, thus affecting CRZ application for redevelopment proposals.
Legislature intended to create a specialist body in the form of National Green Tribunal to consider the validity of orders granting or rejecting applications for EC. The remedy of an appeal with the ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.