SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 50953

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
Shabana – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 15079 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 19 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 37 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 36 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 35 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 95 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 105 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 110 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 172 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 217 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 221 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 230 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 277 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 291 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 310 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 394 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 416 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 418 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 571 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 581 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 579 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 675 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 709 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 722 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 734 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 764 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 773 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 778 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 881 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 883 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 906 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 908 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 949 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 974 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1052 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1053 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1054 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1055 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1057 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1060 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1416 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1550 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1584 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 1698 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 21810 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 21827 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 28004 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 28009 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 21030 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 22057 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 29755 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 20575 OF 2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN, ABDUL RASHIQ A.
For the Respondents: SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP

The Chairman of the District Disaster Management Authority exceeded jurisdiction by issuing orders without an emergent situation, violating provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

Headnote:(A) Disaster Management Act, 2005 - Sections 26(2), 30, 33, 34 and 31(2) - Environmental protection - Order prohibiting soil removal for developmental activities in wetlands passed by District Disaster Management Authority Chairman challenged - Court held that power was exceeded since no emergency existed necessitating such an order, hence quashed. (Paras 9, 15, 19)

(B) Jurisdiction - Scope of the Chairman of District Disaster Management Authority - Powers need to be exercised in emergency situations only as specified under the Act. (Paras 16, 19)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged an order passed by the District Disaster Management Authority which imposed conditions on the removal of soil to prevent environmental degradation in Kollam District. The Chairman's order cited rising complaints of illegal wetland filling affecting the local ecosystem.

Findings of Court:
The impugned order lacks emergency justification and cannot be executed without the approval of the District Authority following proper consultation.

Issues: Whether the Chairman had the power to impose regulations without an emergent need?

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the powers of the District Authority and its Chairperson should be clearly delineated according to the mandated procedures to avoid overreach.

Result: Impugned order quashed, and authority allowed to issue new regulations as appropriate.

Table of Content
1. challenging authority's orders (Para 1)
2. environmental concerns in disaster management are addressed. (Para 2 , 3)
3. authority and jurisdictional limitations of the disaster management authority. (Para 5 , 6)
4. government's responsibility to protect environment (Para 7 , 9)
5. absence of emergency protocols justified legal action taken against authority. (Para 8 , 10)
6. unilateral orders by the chairman lack legitimate jurisdiction. (Para 15 , 16)
7. judgment on order's validity (Para 19)

JUDGMENT

All these batch of cases are filed challenging order No. DCKLM/1827/2020-DM2(5) dated 02.07.2021 (hereinafter referred to as the impugned order) passed by the Chairman, District Disaster Management Authority, Kollam. Since all these cases are filed challenging the very same order, I am disposing of this batch of writ petitions by a common judgment.

2. The impugned order passed by the Chairman is a detailed order that deals with the environmental aspects and the need to protect the same for the well being of the people. It is stated in the impugned order that the land in Kollam district is rich in natural freshwater reservoirs that includes fields, creeks, and other wetlands. It is stated that, during the Monsoon season, these reservoirs contain floodwaters which in summer helps keep the water table of the nearby wells, ponds, and other freshwater sources low. It is further stated that all that has become a myth throughout the Kollam District. It is further stated that much of the area in the district was waterlogged, and today the area is shrinking and is on the verge of oblivion. The apprehension raised by the Chairman in the impugned order is that there is a rush to fill up the last few wetlands and use them for commercial purposes. This has been brought to the notice of the Chairman by the general public through social media. According to the Chairman, Disaster Management Authority, the above acts will endanger the very existence of man. It is also stated that it is impossible to restore the wetlands that have been subjected to such malpractices. It is further stated that, in a densely populated district like Kollam, permission is given to remove soil with restrictions for a number of reasons. The most important of these reasons is granting permission to remove soil to avoid the threat of disaster as part of the Disaster Management activities. It is conceded by the Chairman, Disaster Management Authority that such permission is strictly legal and is granted only on the basis of site inspection and favourable recommendations of the Tahsildar concerned and Geologist. It is only to avoid the threat of disaster. It is also stated that the Disaster Management permissions are issued with strict conditions to monitor where the soil is deposited and to ensure that it is not dumped into the ground or other wetlands for any reason. The permit also stipulates that the earth soil is to be deposited in such places only with the prior permission of the Jurisdictional Tahsildar.

3. It is submitted that the permission for the removal of soil for various development purposes is being granted by the Department of Geology. The permission issued by the Department of Geology does not contain any provision as to where the soil so removed is to be placed. It is submitted by the Chairman, Disaster Management Authority that, complaints have also been received that the soil removed in this way is being used to fill wetlands and paddy fields. According to the Chairman, Disaster Management Authority, conditions similar to those set out in the permit issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (In short, the Act 2005) is necessary to prevent this utterly undesirable acts. Hence a condition is imposed in the impugned order passed by the Chairman, Disaster Management Authority to deposit the removed earth on dry lands only, as the practice of paddy and wetland filling is on the rise which has already led to various environmental disaster. Acc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top