IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34551 of 2010(S)
1. C.G.THAMPI, S/O. C..GOPALN,
... Petitioner
2. M.N.PRABHAKARAN NAIR, S/O. NARAYANAN
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
3. KERALA STATE BIO-DIVERSITY BOARD,
4. KERALA STATE COASTAL ZONE REGULATION
5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM
6. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
7. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
8. KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,
9. T.C.MATHEW, SECRETARY, KERALA CRICKET
10. T.R.BALAKRISNAN, PRESIDENT,
For Petitioner :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
For Respondent :SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.J.CHELAMESWAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :07/02/2011
O R D E R
J. CHELAMESWAR, CJ &
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
..............................................................................
W.P.(C) No. 34551 OF 2010
& I.A.No. 16662 OF 2010
.........................................................................
Dated this the 7th February, 2011
J U D G M E N T
P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.
The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the
following prayers:
” i) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the
respondents 1 to 7 to ensure that the land having
an extent of 23.95 acres in R.S.No. 27/1, 28/1,
29/2, 29/4, 29/5, 29/6, 29/7, 29/8, 30/1, 30/2,
32/1, 32/6, 32/7, 32/9, 33/6, 33/10 and 74/1 in
Edakochy in Ernakulam district is not converted into
a Cricket Stadium and not reclaimed in any manner
and that the said land is conserved as a paddy
lands and wetlands;
ii) to declare that the land in R.S. No.27/1, 28/1,
29/2, 29/4, 29/5, 29/6, 29/7, 29/8, 30/1, 30/2,
32/1, 32/6, 32/7, 32/9, 33/6, 33/10 and 74/1 in
Edakochy in Ernakulam district is not liable to be
converted into a Cricket Stadium and is to be
W.P.(C) No. 34551 OF 2010
2
preserved, without being reclaimed.
iii) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the
respondents 1 to 7 to ensure preservation of the
above land with all the characteristics thereof and
without in any way converting the wet land and
paddy lands in the said area;
iv) to issue a writ of mandamus directing
Respondents 1 to 7 to take appropriate actions
against respondent No.8 and the persons in charge
of respondent No.8 society including Respondents 9
and 10 for attempting to convert the paddy land
and referred in Ext.P3 wetlands into a Cricket
Stadium by violating the law;
v) to issue such other orders, directions or
writs as may be prayed for and that this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit on the facts and circumstances
of the case.”
2. Going by the materials on record, the prayer essentially
is that the property concerned is not liable to be converted into
a Cricket Stadium and is not liable to be reclaimed in any
manner, it being a wet land by virtue of the relevant provisions
of law (the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act,
2008). There is also a case for the petitioners that it comes
W.P.(C) No. 34551 OF 2010
3
under the prohibited zone, by virtue of the parameters prescribed
by the Coastal Zone Management Authority.
3. Mr. Kaleeswaram Raj, the learned Counsel for the
petitioners submits that the 4th respondent has already filed a
counter affidavit along with the relevant records, pointing out
that the property comes under the CRZ-1 zone and as such, no
construction activity is permissible under any circumstances.
4. Mr. G. Sreekumar, the learned Counsel appearing for the
respondents 8, 9 and 10 reiterated the submission already made
before this Court that the said respondents do not intend to
effect any construction at all, contrary to the relevant provisions
of law, unless and until statutory clearance is obtained. The
learned Counsel further submits that the 4th respondent has
already issued a notice to the said respondents with regard to the
the proposal to construct Cricket Stadium and that the above
respondents are pursuing further steps by giving reply.
5. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find it
necessary to go into the merits of the case. The Writ Petition is
disposed of, permitting the respondents 8, 9 and 10 to pursue
W.P.(C) No. 34551 OF 2010
4
the matter by filing appropriate reply before the 4th respondent,
however, making it clear that further steps with regard to
construction of stadium shall be pursued only subject to the
statutory clearance, to be given by the 4th respondent/competent
authority.
I.A. No.16662 OF 2010:
In view of disposal of the Writ Petition as above, this
impleading petition is dismissed.
J. CHELAMESWAR,
CHIEF JUSTICE.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
lk