Kerala High Court
Suo Motu vs State Of Kerala on 4 March, 2022
W.P.(C) No. 41341/2017 :1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 41341 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
SUO MOTU
[WPC 41341/2017 (S) CONVERTED AS SUO MOTU AS PER ORDER
DATED 05/01/2022 IN WPC]
BY ADV SUO MOTU
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FISHERIES AND PORT
DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT,
FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
INDIRA PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, JORBAGH ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 003.
3 THE KERALA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, SASTHRA BHAVAN, PATTOM
P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
4 THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,RUBCO HOUSE, 6TH
FLOOR, SOUTH BAZAR,CIVIL STATION, KANNUR - 670 002.
5 (THE DIRECTOR OF PORTS, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PORTS,
VALIYATHURA, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008.)
REPLACED WITH KERALA STATE MARITIME BOARD
REGIONAL OFFICE, VALIYATHURA
VALLAKKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 008
[RESPONDENT NO. 5 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED IN PLACE OF EARLIER
RESPONDENT NO.5 AS PER ORDER DATED 20.07.2021]
W.P.(C) No. 41341/2017 :2:
6 THE PORT CONSERVATOR
PORT OFFICE, AZHEEKKAL PORT,KANNUR - 670 009.
7 MATTOOL GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
8 PAPPINISSERI GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
9 AZHIKODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
10 VALAPATANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
11 PRESIDENT, PAPPINISSERY KETTIDA NIRMANA THOZHILALI KSHEMA
SAHAKARANA SANGAM LTD. NO.C-1939.
12 NIYAS. M., S/O.MUSSAN KUTTY
MARAYANKANDI HOUSE,
KOLACHERY, PATTAYAM, KANNUR-670 601,
13 MOHANAN T.V
T.V. HOUSE, MATTOOL NORTH P.O
14 K.P. JAFFAR
KARAKKAD, PUTHIYAPURAYIL, MANKADAVU.
15 FAROOQ P.P.
HIRA, P.O. THANA, NEAR MANIKKAKAVU.
16 ANEESH KUMAR. P.
SREEPURAM, MOONU NIRATH, P.O. AZHIKODE.
17 SAJITH K.P.
KAKKANPARAMBATH, MOONU NIRATH, P.O. AZHIKODE.
18 JAFFAR K.P.
S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, KARAKKAT PUTHIYAPURAYIL,
P.O. AAROLI, PAPPINISSERI.
19 MUHAMMAD SHAHJAHAN V.N.
S/O.AMIR,
VATTAKANDI NADUVILE PURAYIL, P.O. PAPPINISSERI.
20 ANAS T.P.
S/O. AMIR ALI. C.T., M.T. HOUSE,
K KANNAPURAM P.O., CHERUKUNNU.
W.P.(C) No. 41341/2017 :3:
[ADDL. R7 TO R20 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 05/01/2022 IN
WPC.]
BY ADVS.
R7 BY SRI. BRIJESH MOHAN
P.M.PAREETH
R10 BY SRI. MUHAMMED SHAFI M
R11, R14, R16 TO R20 BY SRI. P.U.SHAILAJAN
R3 BY SRI.M.P.PRAKASH, SC, KCZMA
K.P.SUDHEER
NIDHEESH T.P
R.RAJPRADEEP
SRI. JOBY JOSE KONDODY, AMICUS CURIAE
R8 & R9 BY SRI. M.P. PRASANTH, SC
R1 & R6 BY SRI. TEK CHAND, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R4 BY SRI. T. NAVEEN, SC
R5 BY SRI. K.P. SUDHEER
R5 BY SRI. ANJALI MENON
R3 BY SRI. M.P. PRAKASH, SC
R2 BY SRI. S. BIJU, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.03.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 41341/2017 :4:
Dated this the 4th day of March, 2022.
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
The petitioner, formerly, a member of Mattoor Grama Panchayat
in Kannur District and the Development Standing Committee Member
of the Panchayat during the period 2004-2009, has filed this Public
Interest Litigation, seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondent
Nos. 1, 5 and 6 namely State of Kerala, represented by its Secretary,
Fisheries and Port Department; Kerala State Maritime Board; and the
Port Conservator, Port Office, Azheekal Port, Kannur, not to carry out
sand mining activity in Valapattanam river in Azheekal Port and its
upstream under the pretext of channel clearing, without obtaining
necessary consent from the Kerala Coastal Zone Management
Authority, the third respondent; to declare that respondents 1, 5 and 6
are conducting sand mining activity in Valapattanam river in Azheekal
Port and its upstream in the pretext of channel clearing without
obtaining necessary consent from the Kerala Coastal Zone
Management Authority, the third respondent; to declare that
respondent Nos. 1, 5 and 6 conducting sand mining activity in
Valapattanam river under the pretext of channel clearing is covered
vide EIA Notification, 2006 issued by the second respondent and
therefore environmental clearance under the said notification is
mandatory for carrying out such activities; to issue a writ of
mandamus directing respondent Nos. 1, 5 and 6 to establish sand
purification unit similar to that of the applicant in Ext. P6 application
submitted for consent, to the Member Secretary, Kerala State Pollution
Control Board-- 4th respondent, if they intend to purify and sell sand
mined from Azheekal Port; and for a further direction to the Kerala
State Pollution Control Board to prohibit all sand purification unit seen
in Ext. P7 photographs established by the side of Valapattanam river
causing pollution to the potable wells in the locality.
2. Since the Valapattanam river was passing through various
Grama Panchayats and contracts were given by the Panchayats to
various contractors for dealing with the sand dredged at the behest of
the Kerala State Maritime Board, the Panchayats as well as the
Contractors were impleaded as additional respondent Nos. 7 to 20 as
per the order dated 05.01.2022 in the writ petition.
3. The basic contention advanced by the petitioner is that the
Kerala State Maritime Board and the Port Conservator are conducting
sand mining in Valapattanam river under the pretext of channel
clearing of Azheekal Port in Kannur District by dredging. It is also
submitted that respondent Nos. 5 and 6 are carrying out sand mining
activities in the upstream of Valapattanam river and by the side of
famous mangroves of Kannur District causing severe ecological
imbalances as well as nuisance to the people in the locality.
4. The further contention of the writ petitioner is that the sand
mined from Valapattanam river is washed in the saline water taken
from the river and the waste water is intruded into the potable wells in
the locality making the entire wells in the area saline and useless.
Therefore, according to the petitioner, the people in the locality is
finding it difficult to obtain potable drinking water due to the illegal
sand purification unit erected in and around the locality by various
private entrepreneurs for and on behalf of the Kerala Maritime Board
and the Port Conservator, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 respectively.
5. The petitioner has produced Exts.P7 series of photographs to
establish that the cleaning activities are taking place by the side of the
river and waste and sludge are being put back to the river, thereby
causing severe pollution. Petitioner has also produced the Ext.P8 series
of photographs to bring to the notice of this Court the thick mangroves
by the side of the Valapattanam river. That apart, the petitioner,
placing reliance upon Ext. P9 office memorandum dated 08.11.2011
issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of
India, in regard to the removal of sand in the Coastal Regulation Zone
area of rivers/estuaries by manual methods by traditional
communities, submitted that the Ministry has stipulated various
mandatory conditions, as per which the removal of sand bar by
traditional coastal communities can only be done manually, and the
said activity shall be considered by the District Collector and a seven-
member committee consisting of concerned officials as also at least
one representative of each from a scientific or technical institute, the
local communities, like fisher folk and the local civil society.
6. It is pointed out that the said office memorandum was
forwarded to the Chairperson of the Coastal Zone Management
Authority, Thiruvananthapuram and therefore, without securing
adequate clearance in accordance with the EIA notification in force and
also consent from the Pollution Control Board, the activity of dredging
and washing the sand cannot be done by the Kerala State Maritime
Board.
7. The Kerala State Maritime Board has filed a detailed counter
affidavit basically contending that the manual dredging in ports is an
activity being carried out since the British era for clearing navigation
channels; and that ban on the mining of river sand and other
restrictions in the State have escalated the selling price of dredged
material persuaded the administrators of co-operative societies to
involve in unscrupulous and illicit activities, which resulted in series of
litigations between the co-operative societies to fetch a slot in
dredging operations. Other facts and figures in respect of the same
are also given, which, in our considered opinion, are not necessary to
adjudicate the issues raised in the writ petition.
8. Anyhow, pursuant to the judgment of this Court in W.A. No.
1855 of 2016 dated 03.11.2016, a new Manual Dredging Policy was
framed by the Government of Kerala, after a detailed scrutiny of all
connected events, reports and matters with the sole objective of
conducting the manual dredging in a transparent manner, ensuring
reasonable wages to the workers and to make available good quality
sand in the market at a reasonable price; and as well for clearing
channel for navigation without incurring any expenditure to the State
Government.
9. The State Government has taken a new policy decision on
manual dredging in the channels and entrusted the same to the Local
Self Government Department/Institutions instead of societies as per
G.O.(Ms.) No. 26/2016 dated 17.08.2016. As per the new Manual
Dredging Policy of the Government, the Local Self Government
Institutions within the port limits are entrusted to perform the manual
dredging using traditional workers and the workers are registered with
the Local Self Government Institutions and paid daily wages at the
rate fixed by the Government. It is also pointed out that the dredged
material will be made available to the common man through an online
booking system and the sale of dredged material at the kadavu is fully
managed by the Port Department in a transparent manner.
10. It is also the case of the Kerala State Maritime Board that
they are discharging their duties with the utmost dedication and
sincerity and the allegations made in the writ petition that they are
indulging in illegal sand mining cannot be sustained. According to the
Kerala State Maritime Board, Ext. P9 office memorandum issued by the
Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, is not
applicable in a mining activity under the Kerala Protection of River
Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001, since the
dredging is not performed in ports under the Indian Ports Act, 1908. It
is also stated that if at all any consent is required from the Pollution
Control Board, it is for the Local Self Government Institutions or the
contractors to file suitable applications and secure the same from the
Kerala State Pollution Control Board. Therefore, according to the said
respondent, the writ petition has no basis and the same is liable to be
dismissed.
11. The coastal Zone Management Authority has filed a detailed
counter affidavit submitting as follows:
'3. It is submitted that pursuant to the decision taken at the
United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held at
Stockholm in 1972, the Parliament in order to provide provisions for
the protection and improvement and for connected matters enacted
the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (the Act for brevity). It is
further submitted that Section 3 (2) (v) of the Act provide that the
Central Government shall have power to take all such measures as it
deems necessary and expedient for the purpose of protecting and
improving the quality of the environment and preventing,
controlling and abating environmental pollution, including to
impose restrictions of areas in which any industries, operations or
processes or class of industries, operations or processes shall not be
carried out or shall be carried out subject to certain safeguards.
4. It is submitted that in exercise of the powers under the Act, the
Government of India as per Notification S.O 114(E) dated
19.02.1991 published in the Gazette of India dated 20.02.1991
imposed prohibitions/restrictions on the location of an industry or on
the carrying on or of processes and operations on the coastal
stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and back waters
which are influenced by tidal action and certain restrictions were
imposed on the setting up and expansion of industries, operations,
processes, etc., in the said Coastal Regulation Zone (referred to
hereinafter as CRZ 1991 for brevity). On the basis of the above CRZ
1991 Notification, Coastal Zone Management Plans (CZMP for
short) were prepared demarcating the High Tide Line (HTL for
short) and were approved in 1996.
5. It is submitted that Government of India in supersession of
CRZ 1991 Notification declared certain areas as Coastal Regulation
Zone and imposed certain restrictions on the setting up and
expansions, operations or processes and the like in CRZ, by
Notification S.O 19 (E) dated 06.01.2011 (hereinafter rererred to as
the CRZ 2011 for brevity). Coastal Zone Management Plans
(CZMPs) under CRZ 2011 were prepared and approved by the
Government of India on 28.02.2019.
6. It is submitted that as per Para 2 (vii) of CRZ 1991, land
reclamation, bunding or disturbing natural course of Sea required for
maintenance or clearing of waterways, channels and ports or for
prevention of sand bars or for tidal regulators, storm water drains or
for structures for prevention of salinity ingress and sweet water
recharge, is an exempted activity.
7. It is submitted that, however as per Para 3 (iv) (c) of CRZ
2011, land reclamation, bunding or disturbing natural course of sea
water required for maintenance or clearing of waterways, channels
and ports can be carried out only after carrying out Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA for short) studies.
8.It is submitted that to the knowledge of this respondent, no
EIA studies have been carried out for maintenance or clearing of
waterways, channels and ports in Azheekal Port area. It is submitted
that the 3rd respondent Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority
has not received any application seeking CRZ clearance for the said
activity.'
12. The sum and substance of the contention advanced by the
Coastal Zone Management Authority is that as per the CRZ
Notification, 2011 dated 06.01.2011, the Coastal Zone Management
Plan was prepared and approved by the Government of India on
28.02.2019. It is also stated that as per Para 2(viii) of CRZ 1991
Notification, every land reclamation, bunding or disturbing natural
course of sea water required for maintenance or clearing of waterways,
channels and ports or for prevention of sand bars or for tidal
regulators, storm water drains or for structures for prevention of
salinity ingress and sweet water recharge, was an exempted activity.
13. However, as per Para 3(iv)(c) of CRZ 2011 Notification, the
aforementioned activities can be carried out only after conducting an
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Studies. Therefore, it is
pointed out that in the instant case, no EIA study has been carried out
for maintenance or clearing of waterways, channels and ports in
Azheekal Port area, and for the said purpose, the Kerala Coastal Zone
Management Authority has not received any application.
14. The Kerala State Maritime Board has also filed a statement
along with Annexure R5 (b) order dated 08.08.2013 passed by the
National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in M.A. No. 803 of
2013 in O.A.No. 286 of 2013, from where it can be gathered that the
issue in respect of mining activities carried out in the ports channel
under Kasargod, Manjeswaram and Cheruvathoor Ports in Kasargod
District and Ponnani Port channel were considered. The State of
Kerala is stated to have submitted in that case, that a survey would
be conducted before issuing execution order or final acceptance of the
tender and that the survey would determine the extent and the
manner in which the dredging should be carried out while entirely
protecting the environmental interests. Accordingly, applications were
disposed of directing the State as well as the other authorities to
ensure that no excessive dredging leading to damage to the
environment or ecology of that area is carried out and also to protect
the plants, mangroves etc.
15. Additional respondent Nos. 7, 9 and 10 namely Mattool
Grama Panchayat, Azhikode Grama Panchayat and Valapattanam
Grama Panchayat respectively, have filed separate counter affidavits
basically explaining the nature of the manual dredging activities taking
place within the panchayat area and the manner in which the auction
is being conducted etc. It is also submitted that since the manual
dredging activities are exempted by the CRZ notification, no
permission is required from the third respondent authority for manual
dredging.
16. That apart, it is pointed out that the selling of river sand is a
major source of income to the Grama Panchayat and so also, it is
helpful to the common man and therefore, if any interference is made
as are sought for in the writ petition, it would seriously affect the
developmental activities of the panchayats, and the construction
activities within the limits of the Panchayats would come to a standstill
abruptly. It is also submitted that the contract was being awarded for
sand dredging and sale of sand from the year 2017-2018 onwards and
up to the ensuing year 2021-2022. The State Pollution Control Board
has filed a report basically stating that consent of the Board is required
for the sand washing and cleaning establishments .
17. Even though the writ petition was filed by a Public Interest
Litigant, later it was informed that due to certain mental disabilities,
the petitioner is not in a position to continue with the writ petition and
thereupon, taking into account the public interest involved in the
matter, we have converted the writ petition as a suo motu writ
petition. Accordingly, we have heard Sri. Joby Jose Kondody, who was
appearing for the petitioner as an Amicus Curiae, learned Senior
Government Pleader Sri. Tek Chand for the State and its officials,
learned Central Government Counsel Sri. S. Biju, learned Standing
Counsel for the Coastal Zone Management Authority Sri. M.P. Prakash,
Sri. K.P. Sudheer and Smt. Anjali Menon for the Kerala State Maritime
Board, Sri. T. Naveen for the Kerala State Pollution Control Board, Sri.
Brijesh Mohan, Sri. P.M. Pareeth, Sri. Muhammed Shafi and Sri. P.U.
Shailajan for respondent Nos. 7, 8 and 9 and 10 and 11, 14, 16 to 18
and 20 respectively, and perused the pleadings and materials on
record.
18. The sole question to be considered is whether the
permission/consent of the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority
and the Kerala State Pollution Control Board are required in order to
conduct the dredging and cleaning of sand. Learned Amicus Curiae
has submitted that the petitioner is basically concerned with the
pollution of the well water consequent to the activities in question and
therefore, unless and until activities are regulated in accordance with
the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011 ('CRZ Notification,
2011' for short) and as per the Environmental Laws by the Kerala
State Pollution Control Board, it would lead to disastrous situations,
and environmental degradation.
19. Bearing in mind the right of the citizens to enjoy the right
and liberty in a meaningful manner by protecting the fundamental
rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, we propose to, first
of all, identify as to whether clearance is required from the Kerala
Coastal Zone Management Authority under the CRZ Notification, 2011.
20. Para 3 of the CRZ Notification, 2011 deals with prohibited
activities within the CRZ area. Clause (iv) of para 3 deals with Land
reclamation, bunding or disturbing the natural course of seawater
except the activities required for setting up, construction or
modernisation or expansion of foreshore facilities like ports, harbours,
jetties, wharves, quays, slipways, bridges, sealink, road on stilts, and
such as meant for defence and security purpose and for other facilities
that are essential for activities permissible under the notification,
provided that such roads shall not be taken as authorised for
permitting development on landward side of such roads till the existing
High Tide Line. It is further provided that the use of reclaimed land
may be permitted for roads, mass rapid or multimodal transit system,
construction and installation, on landward side of such roads, of all
necessary associated public utilities and infrastructure to operate such
transit or transport system including those for electrical or electronic
signal system, transit stopover of permitted designs, except for any
industrial operation, repair and maintenance.
21. However, sub-clause (b) of clause (iv) of para 3 makes it
clear that measures for control of erosion, based on scientific studies,
including Environmental Impact Assessment Studies, are to be carried
on. That apart, clause (c) thereto makes it clear that the
maintenance or clearing of waterways, channels and ports, are to be
based on EIA studies. Para 4 deals with regulation of permissible
activities in the CRZ area, except those prohibited in para 3 above.
22. Relying upon the said provisions, the learned Standing
Counsel for the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority submitted
that for carrying out the aforesaid activities, an EIA study has to be
conducted by the Kerala State Maritime Board and thereafter, the
matter be placed before the Coastal Zone Management Authority in
order to decide as to whether permission can be granted to such
activities. That apart, the EIA notification 2006 is also relevant to the
context. A Schedule is constituted under the said notification in
accordance with paragraphs 2 and 7 therein. Clause 7(e) of the
Schedule deals with ports, harbours, break waters, dredging etc. and
it reads thus:
"Ports, ≥ 5 million TPA of < 5 million TPA (5) "General
Harbours, cargo handling of cargo handling Condition shall
capacity and/or apply.
break waters, capacity (excluding
ports/ harbours Note:
dredging." fishing harbours)
≥10,000 TPA of 1.Capital dredging
fish handling
inside and outside
capacity the port or harbors
channels are
included;
2. Maintenance
dredging is exempt
provided it formed
part of the original
proposal for which
Environment
Management Plan
(EMP) was prepared
and environmental
clearance obtained."
23. Therefore, in our considered opinion, insofar as the present
activity of dredging and cleaning of sand etc. is concerned, an EIA
study has to be conducted by the Kerala State Maritime Board in
respect of the river and other rivers in question and the matter has to
be placed before the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority.
24. It is also clear from the report submitted by the Pollution
Control Board that inspections were conducted in the sand based units
on the basis of the complaints received in the office of the Board and
found that solid waste containing sea shells and other stone particles
deposited during the activity are dumped at the site without periodic
removal; that the solid waste and waste water management facilities
were not adequate; and that the water which flows into the river after
the process is waste water. It is also pointed out that the settling
arrangement provided for the water is not adequate and hence, sand
with clay content got discharged into the river and the clay removed
from the clay tank was heaped in the premises without periodic
removal.
25. The sum and substance of the report is that no full-fledged
waste water treatment is provided before discharging the waste water
back to the river. It is also clear that samples were taken from the
river and were analyzed as per the standards specified by the Bureau
of Indian Standards and on an analysis, it was found that the river
water quality at the centre of the river is good and at the activity area,
it is slightly polluted, which is said to be the condition while sand
dredging and sand washing works are not functioning. That apart, it is
pointed out that as per Annexure R4(c) circular dated 09.07.2019, the
manual of dredging activity is categorised under 'green category',
which means whoever carrying out such activities has to obtain
consent to establish and operate from the Board.
26. We have evaluated the rival submissions made across the
Bar. It is clear from the CRZ Notification, 2011, and the EIA notification
that the Environment Impact Assessment Study is a mandatory
requirement before carrying out even manual dredging operations in
the port area. It is an admitted case of the Kerala State Maritime
Board that no EIA study was conducted and therefore, it is necessary
that a direction is issued to the Kerala State Maritime Board to conduct
EIA studies within a time frame to be fixed by this Court and to place it
before the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority. So also, the
activities of the sand mining, dredging and washing of the sand are all
matters to be dealt with by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board as
per Annexure R4(c) circular dated 09.07.2019. Admittedly, the
consent to establish and consent to operate are not secured by any of
the statutory authorities or contractors.
27. In that view of the matter also, a direction is to be issued to
the Pollution Control Board as well as the statutory authorities.
However, the learned counsel appearing for the Panchayats have
stated that contracts are already awarded and the activities are being
carried out by the Panchayats from the year 2017-2018 onwards; and
that it is done to cater to the needs of the common man, and also it is
an income generated to the Panchayats to carry on with its
developmental activities and therefore, if the Panchayats are directed
to stop the activities all on a sudden, it would cause serious prejudice
to them.
28. Taking into account the above aspects, we are of the view
that a balanced approach is to be made by this Court. Accordingly, we
issue the following directions:
1. The Kerala State Maritime Board shall conduct an Environmental
Impact Assessment Study forthwith and complete the same
within a period of three months and place a report before the
Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority immediately
thereafter.
2. The Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority, on receipt of
the EIA Study report, shall make due enquiries and arrive at its
own independent finding as to whether permission can be
granted for dredging and other activities in contemplation of the
provisions of the CRZ Notification, 2011 and the EIA notification,
2006.
3. The Kerala State Pollution Control Board shall immediately
conduct inspections in the units engaged for cleaning, the sand
dredged by the Kerala State Maritime Board/respective
Panchayats and issue directions for abating the nuisance and the
pollution caused due to the washing of the sand by the riverside.
So also, periodical inspection shall be conducted to ensure that
the conditions imposed by the Kerala State Pollution Control
Board are scrupulously and strictly followed by the
Panchayats/contractors.
4. At any cost, a fresh contract or permission of, whatsoever,
cannot be awarded by the Kerala State Maritime
Board/Panchayats for dredging, washing and cleaning of sand in
the Port areas in question without securing necessary
environmental clearance from the Kerala Coastal Zone
Management Authority, and consent to establish and operate
from the Kerala Pollution Control Board after the ensuing
contract period of 2021-2022.
5. We also make it clear that any dredging activity and washing and
cleaning of sand so dredged, shall not be permitted for the year
2022-2023 and after the present contract period is over, without
the environmental clearance from the Kerala Coastal Zone
Management Authority and consent to establish and operate
from the Kerala State Pollution Control Board.
The Writ Petition is disposed of with the observations and
directions, as above.
sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR,
CHIEF JUSTICE.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY,
JUDGE.
Rv
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41341/2017
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION IDENTITY CARD OF THE
PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF
INDIA DATED 22/10/1998.
EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF GO(K)NO.2/2017/FPD DATED
09/02/2017 ALONG WITH THE DRAFT MANUAL
DREDGING POLICY WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF GO(MS) NO.26/2016/FPD DATED
17/08/2016 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT)NO.369/2015/F&PD DATED
16/05/2015.
EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.71/2014/F&PD DATED
15/12/2014 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY
M/S.RAJADHANI MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED FOR
ESTABLISHING A SAND PURIFICATION UNIT IN TIRUR
TALUK BEFORE THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT OFFICE DATED
27/05/2016
EXHIBIT P7: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PURIFICATION OF MINED
SAND IN KANNUR PORT.
EXHIBIT P8: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE MINING OF SAND UNDER
THE RAILWAY BRIDGE AS WELL AS NEAR TO THE
ELECTRIC TOWER AND MANGROVES BY THE SIDE OF
VALAPATTANAM RIVER
EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED
08/11/2011 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE TEST REPORT OF THE SAND
ANALYSED BY THE GOVERNMENT COLLEGE OF
ENGINEERING, KANNUR
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
Exhibit R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A 1855/2016
DATED 03/11/2016 PASSED BY THIS COURT.
Exhibit R5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS WITNESSING REGULAR
TRAFFIC AT AZHEEKKAL PORT.
ANNEXURE R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS.
ANNEXURE R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ANALYSIS REPORT.
ANNEXURE R4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 09.07.2019
ISSUED BY THE BOARD.
EXHIBIT R5(c) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 05.10.2021 ISSUED BY
MATTOOL GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND ITS ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT R5(d) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 01.10.2021 ISSUED BY
PAPPINISSERI GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND ITS ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT R5(e) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 01.10.2021 ISSUED BY
AZHIKODE GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND ITS ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT R5(f) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 01.10.2021 ISSUED BY
VALAPATTANAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND ITS ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
ANNEXURE R5(a) TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN M.A.NO. 803 OF 2013 IN O.A.
NO. 286/2013 PASSED BY NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL,
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI.
ANNEXURE R5(b) TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 08.08.2014 IN OA
NO. 271/2013 IN O.A. NO. 286/2013 PASSED BY
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW
DELHI.
/True Copy/
PS To Judge.
rv
