Hurried preparation of Coastal Zone Management Plan lead to improper implementation of CRZ notification

 Adv. Sahasramanam.P.B

                                

 

Enactment of law and tolerating infringement is equivalent to not enacting the law, that is what the Supreme Court observed[1] when they directed the Coastal States to prepare the coastal zone management plans identifying and classifying the Coastal Regulation Zones. The process is still going on!

It was In 1996 States like Kerala were forced to draft the plans because of contempt proceedings initiated for not preparing the Plan. The State found a shortcut method for identification. Sitting at Trivandrum a line has been drawn fixing the salinity level without conducting any test for determination. The classification has been done easily by making use of Panchayat and Municipalities into underdeveloped (CRZ-III) and developed areas (CRZ-II). The Central Government did not agree with this type of arbitrary classification and asked them to do it in a different manne[2]r. To determine whether an area is substantially built-up, the ratio of built-up plots to that total plots is to be ascertained. When this ratio is 50 per cent or more, such areas (built-up and buildable) are to be classified as CRZ-II provided the same conforms to the criteria of CRZ-II as per CRZ Notification. The remaining areas will be classified as CRZ-I or III as applicable. But nothing happened.

 

The 1991 notification was strongly criticized by the Committee appointed under the Chairmanship of Prof. M.S.Swaminathan by the Central Government. The report stated there need to be clearly defined terminologies along with the administrative boundaries. In the absence of such clarity, there will be confusion within the enforcing machinery, which will lead to hardship for the local communities and also for taking up developmental activities. The weak implementation by the State Governments is one of the reasons for the increasing number of court cases the Committee observed. The Central Government fully approved the said report and issued a fresh notification on 2011[3].

The main feature of the 2011 notification is the preparation of proper CZMP. The notification mandated the preparation of the Management Plan with the active participation of stakeholders. It contained specific guidelines. CRZ-II areas shall be those areas that have been substantially built up with a ratio of built-up plots to that of total plots are more than 50%. For this, a study is required.  While so the National Green Tribunal forced the States to prepare it before 31st August 2018. They prepared a draft and put it to stakeholders' notice. Even hearing was conducted in flood-affected areas after 14th August 2018 due to treating action on the disobedience of the Tribunal order.

While so the Government of India has come with a notification on 2019[4] wherein a different type of classification was mandated. CRZ-II shall constitute the developed land areas up to or close to the shoreline, within the existing municipal limits or in other existing legally designated urban areas, which are substantially built-up with a ratio of built-up plots to that of total plots being more than 50 percent and have been provided with drainage and approach roads and other infrastructural facilities, such as water supply, sewerage mains, etc. All the Panchayats’ in Kerala are having the above characteristic of the developed area. No doubt the Panchayats’ in Kerala are developed. The Government of Kerala while batting to save the closure of three-star bars and retails outlets of foreign liquor shops stated that all the panchayats in Kerala are developed and having the features of urbanization. If all the Panchayat areas are classified into CRZ-II in 1996, as directed by the Government of India, the Maradu people would not lose their buildings. 

Unless and until proper Coastal Zone Management Plan identifying and classifying the Coastal Regulation Zone areas are prepared the implementation of the CRZ notification is impossible. The improper preparation of the Plan has led to confusion to identify the areas to follow restrictions imposed. Nobody will violate law deliberately. The judicial institutions also have not allowed the executive to prepare the Plans accurately. Fixing time to do some scientific job does not seems to be incorrect especially it pertains to nature.

Kerala has 40 freshwater rivers that reach the  Arabian sea. Drawing a line of salinity as is contemplated under the CRZ notification requires study. Depending on seasons the tide changes and the saline water intrudes. The deepening of the river bed forces the saline water to enter. This Lakshman Rekha up to which the saline water of 5 ppt reaches thus requires a study on all seasons.

Classifications of areas also require a study. How much land can be developed and not developable? Take the case of Cochin Corporation. The entire Cochin Corporation is classified as developed areas (CRZ-II). Subhash Park is an area earmarked as a non-developable area in the Town Development Plan. It should have been classified as CRZ-III. Most of the beach areas in Municipalities are not developed and are to be classified as CRZ-III, instead, they are classified as CRZ-II. Like that several areas in Panchayats are developed and the same has to be categorized as developed areas. A complete study with the assistance of local bodies requires in the order determining the status of the area. 

From the beginning, the Courts were issuing directions to prepare the management plans for the implementation of CRZ restrictions. It is a scientific work that requires more time than writing a pleading. Identifying nature is an important task. Monitor the work done by them, but don’t compel them to do the work. Justice hurried is justice buried.

 

 

 sahasram@gmail.com 



[1] ICELA vs UOI. (1996)5 SCC 281

[2]r Letter dated 27-09-1996

[3] Notification published on 06-01-2011

[4] Notification published o 18-01-2019

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

  Virtual Court hearing saves judicial time – Should be made a permanent feature.   The Indian courts permitted the presentation of testimonial evidence by electronic means and telepresence of the accused much before the pandemic situation. The National Green Tribunal started using the video conferencing facility for hearing cases throughout India in 2018. At that time the Southern Zonal bench was not sitting. But lawyers can go to Court hall in Chennai and argue before the Southern Bench sitting at Delhi through the video conferencing facility arranged at the Court hall. But the Pandemic situation of 2020 made most of the Courts in India function through video conferencing. The lawyers were able to make use of their computers, laptops, iPad, and mobile phones to appear before the High Court and Supreme Court. For the last two years from Supreme Court to all mofussil courts are using the video conferencing method to hear the arguments of the parties. The experience gat...
Read more
 Coastal Regulation Zone laws why it failed in Kerala sahasram@gmail.com  Short History of the CRZ The Government of India has issued the so-called “Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification, 1991” for the purpose of protecting the coastal ecology. Water bodies affected by tidal waters are to be marked as CRZ. Every State has to identify such areas and classify it as CRZ-I, II or III and prepare a Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP). It is at that time MC. Mehta approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court which issued directions to prepare the CZMP. An interim order was issued on 12-12-1994 halting all constructions upto 500 meters from the High Tide Line. This was slightly modified on 09-03-1995  permitting constructions as per the Notification. Finally when the case was disposed for directing the coastal states to finalise the CZMP and get it approved from the MOEF.  Coastal Zone Management  Plan Preparation Hon’ble Justice Kudip Singh of the Supreme Court was very ...
Read more
LINKS TO SOME WRITINGS OF JUSTICE V.R.KRISHNA IYER · A bizarre nuclear deal pursuit · A courageous voice of dissent · A democratic demand · A questionable instrument .State terrorism is no answer to combat terrorism · Accords sans accountability · Appointments and Disappointments · Article 356 should be abolished. · Contempt power and some questions · Criticism of Courts-1 · Criticism of Courts-II · Disasters of distorted urban development. Garbage crisis in Kochi and some lessons. · For a creative strategy. Peace is India’s first charge. · Hidden agenda of TRIPPS · House Privileges and Courts · In Public Interest. Activist judiciary: a pro bono fiduciary vis-a-vis operation public interest litigation. · Imperatives before the judiciary · Judges are public servants, not bosses · Judicial Appointments · Judiciary – A reform Agenda-I · ...
Read more