Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, SHAJI P.CHALY, J
SURESH KUMAR. S – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdictional outline of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. grounds for challenges to mining permissions (Para 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 3. historical context of flood management (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 4. legal compliance of mining operations (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. priority of disaster management over environmental laws (Para 59 , 68) |
JUDGMENT
Shaji P. Chaly, J.
The captioned writ appeal and the public interest writ petition are materially connected in respect of removal of a sandbar from the Thottappally Spillway region in Alappuzha district, and the segregation of the atomic mineral from the sand so removed. Therefore, with the concurrence of all parties, they were heard together and proposed to pass this common judgment. The fundamental issue raised by the appellant and the petitioners is that in the guise of removal of the sand bar for flood management and mitigation invoking the Disaster Management Act 2005, mining is being carried out without securing adequate clearances from the respective statutory authorities.
2. Writ Appeal No. 1643 of 2021 is filed by the writ petitioner challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 17.11.2021 in W. P. (C) No. 15520 of 2021 whereby the
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
