Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 560

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CHENNAI (SOUTHERN ZONE BENCH)
Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member, Satyagopal Korlapati, Expert Member
Jesu Rethinam – Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Coastal Zone Management Authority – Respondent
Original Application No.101 of 2023 (SZ)

Advocates:
For Applicant(s): Mr. A. Yogeshwaran
For Respondent(s): Mr. P.S. Raman, Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith, Dr. D. Shanmuganathan, Mr. AR. L. Sundaresan, Mr. S. Janarthanam

Draft CZMP maps must comprehensively mark all required features per CRZ Notification, 2019, including via targeted ground truthing for notified ecologically sensitive areas, before public consultation to ensure informed participation and coastal protection.

Headnote:(A) Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019 - Annexure IV - Preparation of Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) - Draft CZMP maps challenged for incompleteness, lacking marking of fishing zones, village boundaries, breeding grounds, common properties, long-term housing plans, ecologically sensitive areas like sand dunes, turtle nesting grounds, seagrass beds, and erosion zones - Maps at 1:25,000 scale instead of required 1:4,000 for scrutiny, no comparison with previous maps, no detailed written plan - Tribunal holds draft CZMP must include all mandatory components per Notification, be subject to ground truthing for specifically notified ecologically sensitive areas, incorporate stakeholder inputs before public consultation - Authorities directed to rectify omissions via ground truthing and district suggestions, then republish draft for consultation. (Paras 3, 16-25, 35-42)

(B) Environmental Law - Public Consultation and Ground Truthing - Draft CZMP for public domain must be near-final, leaving minimal room for complaints on missing particulars - Public participation essential for informed decisions; genuine concerns backed by evidence require ground truthing by expert agency - Not roving exercise for entire coast but targeted to specific areas notified - Balance ecocentrism, sustainable development, and coastal community livelihoods. (Paras 35-41)

Facts of the case:
Fishermen community challenged draft CZMP maps uploaded for public comments, alleging omissions of key features like fishing zones, ecologically sensitive areas, housing plans, and non-compliance with prior judicial orders and Notification requirements across multiple coastal districts. Respondents defended maps as compliant with Notification for draft stage, promising additions post-consultation.

Findings of Court:
Draft maps incomplete; must incorporate ground truthing for notified ecologically sensitive areas, district collector suggestions, and all Annexure IV components before republication and public hearing.

Issues: Whether draft CZMP maps comply with CRZ Notification, 2019; adequacy of marked features including ecologically sensitive areas, fisheries infrastructure, and hazard mapping; necessity of ground truthing and stakeholder inputs prior to consultation.

Ratio Decidendi: CZMP preparation demands satellite imagery plus ground truthing for revisions/specific concerns; draft must be comprehensive to enable effective public consultation; authorities bound to rectify identified omissions before hearings, ensuring coastal regulation balances environment and livelihoods.

Result: Original Application disposed with directions for ground truthing, incorporation of inputs, corrections, and republication of draft CZMP.

Table of Content
1. applicants challenge incomplete czmp maps lacking key features. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 14)
2. prior judicial orders mandated compliant czmp preparation. (Para 5 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. crz notifications balance development and coastal conservation. (Para 6 , 7)
4. draft czmp incorporates fishing features; dynamic revisions allowed. (Para 17)
5. ecologically sensitive areas marked in crz-ia maps. (Para 18)
6. judicial orders complied; erosion zones for final maps. (Para 19)
7. 1:25000 scale maps sufficient for draft consultation. (Para 20 , 21)
8. public consultation followed 45-day period and notices. (Para 22)
9. previous and draft maps accessible for comparison. (Para 23)
10. ncscm to incorporate fisheries data post-consultation. (Para 24 , 26)
11. high court directions require detailed czmp mapping. (Para 25 , 27 , 28 , 29)
12. district inputs highlight omissions for correction. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
13. ground truthing essential beyond satellite imagery. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
14. public consultation ensures informed czmp decisions. (Para 41)
15. direct ground truthing and incorporate stakeholder inputs. (Para 42)
16. application disposed with compliance directions. (Para 43)

JUDGEMENT

Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member

1. The fishermen community represented by the first applicant and the second applicant himself being a member of the fishermen community have challenged the draft Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) Maps uploaded by the respondent authority on the website of the Department of Environment.

2. It is alleged that the 105 Maps uploaded for the districts of Chengalpattu, Cuddalore, Kanyakumari, Mayiladuthurai, Nagapattinam, Pudukkottai, Ramanathapuram, Thanjavur, Thiruvaur, Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli and Villupuram are incomplete, as they do not even have all the necessary components marked in the maps.

3. It is alleged further that the fundamental components like fishing zone in the water bodies and fishing village boundaries, breeding and spawning grounds of fish, common properties of the fishermen community, and detailed plans for long-term housing needs of coastal fishing community are not earmarked on any of the 105 CZMP map sheets uploaded. The map also had not marked the existing authorized developments on the seaward side which would result in frustrating the identification of future violations. The ecologically sensitive features like sand dunes, turtle nesting grounds, seagrass beds, sanctuaries, and reserve forests have also not been marked.

4. It is further alleged that no written plan has been published and only a generic document stating the contents of the CRZ Notification is published. There is also no specific long- term housing plan for coastal fishermen which is an essential component considering the threat of climate change induced sea level rise. The difference between the previous map and the present map is not distinctly marked for easy understanding. Though 1:4000 scale maps have to be uploaded for scrutiny, only 1:25000 scale maps have been prepared and uploaded for comments. Finally, erosion zones have not been marked despite directions from this Tribunal in O.A. No.04 of 2013 (SZ).

5. This is not the first occasion or litigation relating to the preparation of the CZMP. There were challenges earlier before this Tribunal as well as before the Hon’ble High Court.

6. The Central Government, with a view to ensure the livelihood, and security of the fishermen communities and other local communities living in the coastal areas, to conserve and protect the coastal stretches, its unique environment and its marine area and to promote development through sustainable manner based on the scientific principle taking into account the dangerous of the natural hazards in the coastal area, sea level rise due to global warming, issued the CRZ Notification, 1991 vide S.O. 114 (E) dated 19.02.1991. These regulations are issued to strike a balance between e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 560

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CHENNAI (SOUTHERN ZONE BENCH)Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member, Satyagopal Korlapati, Expert MemberJesu Rethinam – AppellantVersusTamil Nadu Coastal Zone Management Authority – RespondentOriginal Application No.101 of 2023 (SZ)

Draft CZMP maps must comprehensively mark all required features per CRZ Notification, 2019, including via targeted ground truthing for notified ecologically sensitive areas, before public consultation to ensure informed participation and coastal protection.

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CHENNAI (SOUTHERN ZONE BENCH)
Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member, Satyagopal Korlapati, Expert Member
Jesu Rethinam – Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Coastal Zone Management Authority – Respondent
Original Application No.101 of 2023 (SZ)