2005 Supreme(Mad) 1703
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. KARPAGAVINAYAGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. SINGHARAVELU
Trust for Restoration of Ecology and Environment - Appellant
Versus
The Member Secretary Tamilnadu Coastal Zone Management Authority O/o.The Director - Respondents
Writ Petition.No.11864 of 2002 & W.P.M.P.No.15975 of 2002
Decided On : 26 October 2005
Coastal Regulation Zone Notification prohibits sand mining and extraction of sand from coast.
Headnote:Constitution of India (1950), Art.226 - Coastal Zone Regulation Notification dated 19.2.1991 - Coastal Regulation Zone Notification prohibits sand mining and extraction of sand from coast and raising unauthorised structures in coastal area -State Government directed to take preventive measures for cessation of such illegal activities.
(Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, as stated thereunder.)
M. Karpagavinayagam, J.
Trust for Restoration of Ecology and Environment, represented by its Trustee T.Murugavel, has filed this writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus giving suitable directions to the Member Secretary, Tamilnadu Coastal Zone Management Authority, Chennai.
2. The prayer in the writ petition is as follows:
"It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other order or direction in the nature of a writ directing the respondent-Member Secretary, Tamilnadu Coastal Zone Management Authority to take all measures including preventive measures for cessation of all illegal activities including clearing and levelling of land, extraction and removal of sand, raising unauthorised structures, on the Elliots Beach, north of the Urur Olcott Kuppam and ensure compliance of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification dated 19.02.1991 remediate the areas affected by the sand extraction and pass such further or other order as may be necessary."
3. The case of the petitioner is as follows:
"The petitioner is a public charitable trust instituted for the purpose of making all efforts to protect and preserve the environment, promote environmental awareness amongst people and ensure the effective use of the legal process to redress public grievances relating to depletion of the environment. The Adyar Creek in Chennai is of a tidal type and a part of the natural estuarine ecosystem, located right in the heart of the city. The Adyar river, of which the creek is part, has become highly polluted over the years. However, the estuary still has vegetation which is capable of regeneration. There is also a nesting ground for migratory birds. Over the years despite the increasing urbanisation, almost 173 varieties of birds continue to flock to the area. Attempts are being made to put up construction in the area recently. This has been successfully resisted by the public interest groups and organisations including the petitioner. The Supreme Court by the order dated 18.4.1996 already directed all the Coastal States to prepare a Coastal Zone Management Plan as mandated by the Coastal Zone Regulation Notification. However, the recent threat to the ecosystem is the move on the part of the private construction lobby to clear the land, without any permission and put up structures on the Elliots Beach, adjacent to the Theosophical Society and north of the Urur Olcott Kuppam. There has been constant removal of sand from the Beach along the Urur Olcott Kuppam, in large quantities during night house in lorries. On noticing the illegal construction activity on the Beach causing a disastrous impact on the fragile eco-system of the Adyar river and the coast, the petitioner sent two representations on 6.3.2002 and 12.3.2002 requesting the Member Secretary, the respondent to take measures to stop the said illegal activity. There was no response. Thus, the respondent has been turning a blind eye to the indiscriminate growth of illegal construction and illegal removal of sand in the prohibited areas in the Coastal Regulation Zone. Hence, this writ petition."
4. The contents of the counter affidavit filed by the Member Secretary, the respondent, in brief, is as follows:
"The officials of the Department of Environment made a site inspection on 26.3.2003 and found that there are two hoardings erected in the site. They were removed by the Corporation officials with the help of police. The intention of the respondent and Government of Tamil Nadu is to safeguard the ecological importance of the Adyar Creek by suitable conservation and preventive measures. Since already remedial actions were taken by way of removing the hoardings, there is no need for the fear entertained by the petitioner."
5. To this, the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit