INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WELFARE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A scheme has been formulated for linking the main land of Cochin with a few of the Islands in the archipelago situated beyond the western backwaters. A body has been constituted for its implementation. The name of the said body is "Goshree Island Development Authority" (its acronym is "GIDA"). The scheme involves construction of bridges connecting those islands with the main land - Ernakulam. It also envisages reclamation of an area of 362 hectares in the Vembanad lake abutting the Arabian sea. The cost estimated for this major, scheme is roughly 328 crores of rupees. Propounders of GIDA were initially enthusiastic in implementation of the scheme. But such activities had to be slow pedalled when the public interest litigation was launched at the instance of a society registered claiming itself to be interested in the social welfare of general public. The Original Petition filed by them for a writ of prohibition restraining the authorities to stop the project for reclamation and construction of bridges was dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court against which the Institute filed this writ Appeal. A Division Bench which heard the writ appeal earlier and dismissed it when the State Government informed the Court that the implementation of the scheme would be confined to construction of bridges after obtaining requisite sanction wherever it is required. Government Pleader further pointed out that "the reclamation work is limited to the construction of the bridge and for the purpose of putting up necessary posts for supporting the bridge". Hence the Division Bench expressed that it is not, clear from the averments in the Original Petition as to how the construction of the bridges would cause environmental damage. So the writ appeal was dismissed on 30-8-1994. State Government has filed a review petition for apprising the court that reclamation work cannot be limited to the construction of bridges. When the review petition was heard, it was agreed by both sides that writ appeal can be disposed of afresh in view of this changed stand of the State Government. We then allowed the review petition and heard the Writ Appeal afresh.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant has stated at the Bar that they are not opposing the construction of bridges for linking Ernakulam with Vypeen and other islands, but they seriously oppose the proposed reclamation of a vast area in the Vembanad lake towards implementation of the scheme. The proposal regarding use of the reclaimed area is to locate various commercial activities thereon.

(3.) Government of India have issued a notification under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 on 19-2-1991 declaring the Coastal Stretches of sea etc., including backwaters "which are influenced by tidal action (in the landward side) upto 500 meters from the High Tide Line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and the HTL as Coastal Regulation -one (CR-)". Certain restrictions have been imposed by the Central Government as per the same notification regarding the activities in the said -one (CR-). One of the restrictions is "land reclamation" in the said zone.