The legality of the National Highway Authority's dredging activities was affirmed, emphasizing the need for balance between infrastructure development and environmental protection, with administrative orders subject to proper safeguards.

JUDGMENT :

Syam Kumar V.M., J.

These Public Interest Litigations raise common questions for consideration and are hence heard and disposed of together.

2. Dredging of rivers and water bodies within the State by the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) through its agents/concessionaires, and the use of the dredged material for the ongoing construction work on National Highway No.66, free of cost, is the subject matter of these PILs.

3. Petitioners allege that indiscriminate mining of material, including sand from the rivers and water bodies, being carried out by the NHAI/its agents without environmental clearance is illegal and is causing ecological damage as well as loss of revenue to the State.

4. While the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.148 of 2025, inter alia, seeks to quash Exhibits P1 and P2 Government Orders (GOs) dated 21.04.2025 and 28.11.2024, respectively, issued by the respondents permitting dredging by the NHAI of the water bodies and the use of earth materials therefrom in the development of National Highways, the petitioner in W.P.(PIL) No.159 of 2025 raises the specific issue of such dredging in the Kottapuram river and inter alia challenges the GO dated 21.04.2025 as well as GO dated 14.05.2025 (Exhibit P2) and seeks a declaration that the dredging activities carried out by the NHAI/ its concessionaires from the bed of the Kottapuram river are violative of the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act , 2001, rendering such activity fit to be declared illegal. Thus, the challenge to GO dated 21.04.2025 (Exhibit P1), which authorises NHAI/its agents/ concessionaires to undertake dredging activities in the State’s water bodies, is common to both Writ Petitions. For the sake of easy reference to facts and exhibits, W.P.(PIL) No.148 of 2025 is taken as the lead case.

5. State respondents have filed their respective counter-affidavits and additional counter affidavits. Statements/Memo have also been filed by the State pursuant to the directions of this Court. No counter affidavits have been filed by the private party respondents.

6. Heard Mr.Jamsheed Hafiz, Advocate and Ms. Amrin Fathima, Advocate for the petitioners, Mr.B.G.Bidan Chandran Advocate, for the National Highway Authority of India and Ms.B. Vinitha, Senior Government Pleader, on behalf of the State. Advocate Sindhu Santhalingam appeared for the 10th respondent concessionaire.

7. Contentions of the Petitioners in W.P.(PIL) No. 148 of 2025 in brief:

Exhibit P1 Government Order dated 21.04.2025, allowing dredging by the NHAI from the waterbodies of the state is illegal, arbitrary and bad in law.

Exhibit P1 GO has been issued relying on certain earlier GOs issued by the Coastal and Shipping and Inland Navigation Department (3rd respondent), which were intended for the limited purpose of navigational dredging and maintenance of National Waterways.

The 3rd respondent had been issuing various GOs, including those dated 15.03.2024, 20.09.2024, 28.11.2024 inter alia granting approval of dredging of the National Waterways, including the Ashtamudi Lake. Exemption accorded therein from paying the price of sand royalty and seigniorage was subject to limiting the use of dredged material for the development of NH-66, and the same envisages retention of records of dredged quantities of earth.

Exhibit P1 order issued by the Water Resources Department of the State, however, allows indiscriminate dredgi