G.MOHANDAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is residing in a property adjoining Chilavannur Lake, on its eastern side. The property of the petitioner is situated within the limits of the fourth respondent Kochi Municipal Corporation (the Corporation). During 2005, the Corporation had decided to construct a cycle track and walkway across the Chilavannur Lake, and entrusted the construction of the same to the third respondent, the Kochi Metro Rail Limited. In order to enable the construction of the cycle track and walkway, the third respondent has constructed a temporary bund across the lake. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that on account of the construction of the temporary bund, during rainy season, there is flooding in the properties on either side of the lake. The petitioner and similarly placed persons have been, therefore, making requests to the Corporation and also to the third respondent to take action to prevent flooding in the area by making appropriate openings in the temporary bund. Exts.P2 and P4 are two representations submitted by the people in the locality for the said purpose. The writ petition is filed thereafter, seeking directions to the respondents concerned to comply with the demands made in Exts.P2 and P4 representations.

(2.) Counter affidavits have been filed by the third and the fourth respondents.

(3.) When the matter was taken up, the learned Senior Counsel for the third respondent has pointed out, placing reliance on paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the Corporation that Chilavannur Lake is a water body included in CRZ-1 category in terms of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011; that approval of the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority (the KCZMA) is required for the above project; that the construction work was infact started before obtaining approval of KCZMA and that the approval sought for the project has now been declined by the KCZMA. Paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the Corporation, on which reliance was placed by the learned Senior Counsel for the third respondent to make the aforesaid submissions, reads thus: