Kerala High Court
[email protected] Devi.T vs State Of Kerala on 12 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 23RD MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.28101 OF 2019(K)
PETITIONER:
[email protected] DEVI.T,
AGED 52 YEARS
DAUGHTER OF SARASWATHY KUNJAMMA,
THARAMEL, EZHIKKARA, NORTH PARAVUR,
ERNAKULAM - 683 513.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN
SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE,
DEVIKRIPA, PALLIMUKKU, PETTAH P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 KERALA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DIRECTORATE OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE
CHANGE, 4TH FLOOR,
KSRTC BUS TERMINAL, THAMPANOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT,
FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE, 4TH FLOOR,
KSRTC BUS TERMINAL, TAMPANOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4 NATIONAL CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABLE COASTAL
MANGEMENT,
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE,
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..2..
(MOEF AND CC), ANNA UNIVERSITY CAMPUS,
CHENNAI - 600 025,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.PRAKASH
R3-4 BY SMT.O.M.SHALINA, CGC
OTHER PRESENT:
GP .K.J.MANURAJ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 12-02-2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..3..
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of February, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner owns 2 hectares and 62.2 Ares of land in
Mulavukad Village in Ernakulam District. In the revenue records, the
land of the petitioner is shown as "Nilam". The land of the
petitioner is being used for cultivation of Pokkali, a saline tolerant
rice variety and also for aquaculture, making use of the water in the
adjoining water body. In the Coastal Zone Management Plan
prepared by the State Government pursuant to the Coastal
Regulation Zone Notification, 2011 issued under the Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986, the land of the petitioner falls under CRZ-IB
Zone, namely the lands falling within the High Tide Line and Low
Tide Line. It is stated by the petitioner that her land has been
brought under CRZ-IB Zone solely based on satellite pictures, as
having regard to the purpose for which the land is being used, the
land would appear to be a water body in the satellite pictures. The
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..4..
petitioner admits that tidal water would flow in her land, but she
states that the flow of tidal water into the land is regulated by
constructing a bund and sluice. According the petitioner, when tidal
water does not flow naturally to the land, such lands cannot be
categorised as CRZ-IB Zone. It is also the case of the petitioner that
when land owners are able to protect their lands from tidal effects,
their lands cannot be brought under CRZ-IB Zone. It is alleged by
the petitioner that similar lands in Kuttanad area where the entry of
saline water is restricted by construction of bunds are not brought
under the Coastal Zone Management Plan at all. It is also alleged by
the petitioner that the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority
has appointed a committee to determine the status of Pokkali fields
in Kerala, where tidal water is allowed to enter through the
embankment and the said committee has made recommendations
in the year 2006 to exclude Pokkali fields from the restricted zones
and the Coastal Zone Management Plan impugned in the writ
petition has been prepared ignoring the recommendations of the
said committee. The petitioner submits that Ext.P8 is the report
submitted by the said committee. The petitioner, therefore, seeks
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..5..
appropriate directions to the State Government to revise the Coastal
Zone Management Plan prepared pursuant to the Coastal Regulation
Zone Notification, 2011 and include the land of the petitioner in
CRZ-II Zone therein.
2. It is seen that the petitioner has preferred a
representation before the State Government for revising the Coastal
Zone Management Plan in the manner sought for in the writ petition
and the said representation was not considered by the Government.
It is also seen that this court passed an interim order on 16.11.2019
directing the State Government to forward the said representation
to the second respondent and directing the second respondent to
consider the same. Pursuant to the said interim order, the second
respondent considered and rejected the representation of the
petitioner as per Ext.P7 order. The writ petition, in the
circumstances, was amended and a prayer for quashing Ext.P7
order was also incorporated.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel for the
second respondent as also the learned Central Government Counsel.
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..6..
4. It is seen that the Coastal Zone Management Plan
prepared by the State Government pursuant to the Coastal
Regulation Zone Notification, 2011 has been approved by the
competent authority on 28.02.2019 and the same has been in force
for the last two years. It is also seen that Coastal Regulation Zone
Notification, 2011 has been revised in the meanwhile by the Central
Government on 18.01.2019 by issuing another notification and the
Coastal Zone Management Plan prepared by the State Government
pursuant to the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011,
therefore, would be in force only till Coastal Zone Management Plan
under the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019 is finalized by
the State Government. On a query from the Court, the learned
Government Pleader submitted that steps for finalizing the Coastal
Zone Management Plan pursuant to Coastal Regulation Zone
Notification, 2019 is underway and the same is likely to be published
soon, though he did not make any commitment as to the exact time
limit within which the same will be brought into force. As noted, the
grievance of the petitioner concerns the Coastal Zone Management
Plan prepared pursuant to the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification,
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..7..
2011. Insofar as steps have already been taken to revise the
impugned Coastal Zone Management Plan and insofar as it is
submitted that the revision would take place soon, I am of the view
that it is unnecessary for this Court to go into the correctness of the
impugned Coastal Zone Management Plan. It is submitted by the
learned Government Pleader that as per the norms, there would be
public hearing before finalizing the Coastal Zone Management Plan
pursuant to the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019 and the
petitioner will be entitled to raise her objection against inclusion of
her lands in any of the coastal regulation zones in the course of the
said public hearing.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed
of making it clear that the inclusion of the land of the petitioner in
CRZ-IB Zone in the Coastal Zone Management Plan prepared under
the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011 will not preclude the
petitioner from raising objections against inclusion of her land in any
of the coastal regulation zones in the Coastal Zone Management
Plan proposed under the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019.
Needless to say that if such objections are raised by the petitioner in
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..8..
the public hearing in connection with the finalization of the Coastal
Zone Management Plan pursuant to the Coastal Regulation Zone
Notification, 2019, the same shall be addressed by the State
Government. Similarly, the State Government shall also consider
the report of the committee appointed by the Kerala Coastal Zone
Management Authority as regards the status of Pokkali fields, while
finalizing the plan.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE
ds 08.2.2021
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..9..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION
CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
PERTAINING TO THE SAID LANDS, DATED
23.03.2019.
EXHIBIT P2 GOOGLE EARTH IMAGES OF THE PROPERTY OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER,
DATED 28.05.2019.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE MANUAL ON
DEMARCATION OF HIGH TIDE LIND AND LOW
TIDE LINE AND PREPARATION OF CZMP OF
THE COAST OF INDIA ORDER OF THE
RESPONDENT, DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE
REPRESENTATION MADE OT THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 04.10.2019.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BUNDS THROUGH
WHICH THE WATER ENTERS THE PROPERTY OF
THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPHY OF THE ORDER NO
2092/A2/2019/KCZMA, DATED 1.2.2020 OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPORT OF
THE COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE
RECOMMENDATION OF REPORT ON MULAVUKAD
GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND EXAMINE THE
POSSIBILITY OF RECTEGORIZATION OF
W.P.(C) No.28101 of 2019 ..10..
POKKALI FIELDS AND BANKS FROM CRZ-
1(1), DATED NIL
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE MANUAL ON DEMARCATION
OF HIGH TIDE LINE AND LOW TIDE LINE
AND PREPARATION OF CZMP OF THE COAST
OF INDIA.
