Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 4085

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 include mandatory features via ground truthing for specific omissions and stakeholder inputs before public consultation to ensure effective participation and coastal protection under CRZ Notification 2019.

Headnote:(A) Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019 - Annexure IV - Preparation of Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) - Draft CZMP maps challenged for incompleteness, lacking fishing zones, village boundaries, breeding grounds, common properties, long-term housing plans, ecologically sensitive features, erosion zones, and proper scale - Tribunal holds that draft maps must include all mandatory components via ground truthing where omissions specifically pointed out, incorporate stakeholder inputs before public consultation, and ensure public participation with complete plans - CZMP is dynamic document subject to revisions post-public hearing, but draft must be near-final to enable effective consultation. (Paras 16-42)

(B) Environmental Law - Public Consultation - Fundamental principle requiring draft plans close to final to minimize complaints; authorities must verify genuine public concerns through ground truthing of specific areas, balancing ecocentrism and sustainable development - General objections insufficient to derail process. (Paras 40-41)

Facts of the case:
Fishermen community challenged draft CZMP maps uploaded for public scrutiny in multiple coastal districts, alleging omissions of key features like fishing zones, ecologically sensitive areas, housing plans, and non-compliance with prior judicial orders and Notification requirements; respondents defended maps as compliant with 1:25000 scale for consultation stage, promising additions post-hearing.

Findings of Court:
Draft CZMP incomplete; direct ground truthing of pointed ecologically sensitive areas, incorporation of district collectors' inputs, corrections per Annexure IV, and revised publication before public hearing.

Issues: Whether draft CZMP maps comply with CRZ Notification 2019, prior judicial directions, and include all required features; adequacy of scale, public consultation process, and need for ground truthing.

Ratio Decidendi: Draft CZMP must be comprehensive, incorporating satellite imagery, ground truthing for specific omissions, and stakeholder data to protect coastal ecosystems and communities; public hearings follow mandatory corrections and 45-day consultation.

Result: Original Application disposed of with directions for revisions, ground truthing, and fresh public process.

Table of Content
1. applicants challenge incomplete czmp maps lacking key features. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 14)
2. prior litigation mandated compliant czmp preparation. (Para 5 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. crz notifications balance development and coastal conservation. (Para 6 , 7)
4. respondents defend draft czmp compliance with crz 2019. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. reports confirm omissions requiring corrections per prior orders. (Para 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
6. ground truthing essential for accurate czmp beyond satellite data. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41)
7. direct ground truthing and incorporate stakeholder inputs. (Para 42)
8. 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 economic growth and environmental conservation.

7. By implementing these regulations, the countries can safeguard fragile ecosystems. The first CZMP was prepared based on the 1991 Notification in the year 1996 and the same was approved on 27.09.1996. Subsequently, the CRZ Notification, 1991 was superseded by CRZ Notification, 2011 in S.O. No.19 (E) dated 06.01.2011. Clause (5) of the CRZ Notification, 2011 provides for the preparation of the CZMP. Thereafter, the said CRZ Notific

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 4085

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 include mandatory features via ground truthing for specific omissions and stakeholder inputs before public consultation to ensure effective participation and coastal protection under CRZ Notification 2019.

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)