LexTHE KERALA STATE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY versus THE STATE OF KERALA MARADU MUNICIPALITY & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 625 THE KERALA STATE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY v. THE STATE OF KERALA MARADU MUNICIPALITY & ORS. (Civil Appeal Nos. 4784-4785 of 2019) MAY 08, 2019 [ARUN MISHRA AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.] Environmental Laws : Coastal areas notified as CRZ-III – Appellant authority empowered to deal with the environmental issues relating to the notified CRZ – Allegation that there was violation in issuance of building permits by the Panchayats – The dispute was that respondent builders were carrying out construction activities on the shores of the backwaters in Ernakulam in the State of Kerala which supports large biologically diversity and constitutes one of the largest wetlands in India – The area in which the respondents carried out construction activities is part of a tidally influenced water body and the construction activities in those areas are strictly restricted under the provisions of CRZ Notifications – Government directed concerned bodies to revoke all the flawed building permits exercising its powers under rr.16 and 23 of Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 – Notice issued to the builders asking to show cause why the building permits issued to them be not cancelled – Writ petition against the notice was allowed on the ground that permit holders could not be taken to task for the failure of local authorities in complying with the statutory provisions and notifications – Appellant authority filed the instant appeal – A Committee was constituted by this court which gave findings that the area in dispute fell in CRZ-III of Coastal Zone Regulations – Held: With respect to CRZ-III, the relevant notification dated 19.2.1991 indicated that the area of 200 meters from High Tide Line is no development zone and no construction was permissible within this zone except for repairs of the authorized structures not exceeding existing FSI – It is necessary for the local authority to follow the restrictions imposed by the notification, as amended from time to time – Thus, it was not open to the local authority, i.e., Panchayat, in view of the notification of 1991 to grant any kind of permission without the concurrence of [2019] 8 S.C.R. 625 625 A B C D E F G H 626 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 8 S.C.R. the appellant authority – Admittedly, Panchayat did not forward any such applications for building permissions – As such, once a due inquiry was held by the Committee, there was no escape from the conclusion that the area fell within CRZ-III and it was wholly impermissible and unauthorised construction within the prohibited area – Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 – rr.16 and 23 – Environment Protection Act, 1986. Judicial notice: Judicial notice taken of recent devastation in Kerala which had taken place due to heavy rains compounded by such unbridled construction activities resulting in colossal loss of human life and property due to such unauthorised activity – In the instant case, permission granted by the Panchayat was illegal and void – No such development activity could have taken place in prohibited zone – In view of the findings of the Enquiry Committee, directions passed to remove all the structures within a period of one month – Environment Protection Act, 1986 – Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 – rr.16 and 23. Piedade Filomena Gonsalves v. State of Goa (2004) 3 SCC 445 : [2004] 2 SCR 1135 ; Vaamika Island (Green Lagoon Resort) v. Union of India & Ors. (2013) 8 SCC 760 – relied on. Ratheesh v. State of Kerala 2013 (3) KLT 840 – approved. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996) 5 SCC 281 : [1996] 1 Suppl. SCR 507 – referred to. Case Law Reference [1996] 1 Suppl. SCR 507 referred to Para 3 [2004] 2 SCR 1135 relied on Para 4 (2013) 8 SCC 760 relied on Para 14 2013 (3) KLT 840 approved Para 16 A B C D E F G H 627 THE KERALA STATE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTH. v. THE STATE OF KERALA MARADU MUNICIPALITY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 4784- 4785 of 2019. From the Judgment and Order dated 02.06.2015 of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in W.A. No. 132 of 2013 and order dated 11.11.2015 in Review Petition No. 787 of 2015. With Civil Appeal Nos. 4790-4793, 4786-4789 of 2019. Romy Chacko, Shapti Chand J., Vishant Singh, Advs. for the Appellant. V. Giri, Jayanth Muthraj, Sr. Advs., Ranjan Kumar, Mohammed Sadique T.R., Anu K. Joy, Amith Krishnan, Alim Anvar, G. Prakash, Jishnu M.L., Mrs. Priyanka Prakash, Mrs. Beena Prakash, M.T. George, Avishkar Singhvi,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.