Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed appeals by Kapico Kerala Resorts Pvt. Ltd. challenging a Kerala High Court order that prohibited resort construction on Nediyathuruthu island in Vembanad lake. The High Court had allowed writ petitions by fishermen and a society, directing removal of encroachments and stopping further construction. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's findings that the CRZ Notification of 1991 applies to backwater islands, and the project proponent failed to obtain necessary clearances. The court also noted that the review petitions were correctly dismissed due to the doctrine of merger after the Supreme Court's earlier decision in Vaamika Island v. Union of India. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Court's directions.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Coastal Regulation Zone - Applicability to Backwater Islands - CRZ Notification 1991 - The court held that backwater islands like Nediyathuruthu are covered under the CRZ Notification of 1991, and the classification under CRZ I or CRZ III imposes restrictions on construction, including a no development zone. The project proponent's claim that the notification did not apply was rejected. (Paras 13-14)
B) Environmental Law - Coastal Zone Management Plan - Validity - CRZ Notification 1991 - The court upheld the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Plan and the High Court's finding that the island falls within CRZ, rejecting the appellant's challenge to the plan's validity. (Paras 13-14)
C) Property Law - Right to Property - Article 300A - CRZ Notification 1991 - The court held that the restrictions under CRZ Notification do not violate Article 300A as they are reasonable regulations in the interest of environmental protection. (Para 9)
D) Civil Procedure - Doctrine of Merger - Review Petition - The High Court correctly dismissed the review petitions applying the doctrine of merger after the Supreme Court confirmed the judgment in Vaamika Island v. Union of India. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the CRZ Notification of 1991 applies to backwater islands like Nediyathuruthu and whether the construction of a resort is permissible under the Coastal Regulation Zone norms.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the Kerala High Court's order that prohibited further construction on Nediyathuruthu island and directed removal of encroachments. The court held that the CRZ Notification of 1991 applies to backwater islands and the project proponent failed to obtain necessary clearances.
Law Points
- Coastal Regulation Zone Notification 1991 applies to backwater islands
- CRZ I and CRZ III classifications
- No Development Zone
- Doctrine of Merger
- Article 300A
- Kerala Coastal Zone Management Plan
Case Details
Civil Appeal Nos.184-186 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos.34143-34145 of 2013) and Civil Appeal No.187 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (C) No.21927 of 2014)
Kapico Kerala Resorts Pvt. Ltd.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeals against a common order of the Kerala High Court prohibiting resort construction in a backwater island.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought to set aside the High Court order and allow construction of a resort on Nediyathuruthu island.
Filing Reason
The appellant challenged the High Court's order that directed removal of encroachments and prohibited further construction, arguing that CRZ Notification 1991 did not apply to backwater islands.
Previous Decisions
The Kerala High Court disposed of seven writ petitions on 25.07.2013, allowing petitions by fishermen and a society and dismissing those by the project proponents. Review petitions were dismissed on 10.12.2013 applying the doctrine of merger after the Supreme Court confirmed the judgment in Vaamika Island v. Union of India.
Issues
Whether the CRZ Notification of 1991 applies to backwater islands like Nediyathuruthu.
Whether the construction of a resort is permissible under the CRZ norms without proper clearance.
Whether the High Court correctly applied the doctrine of merger in dismissing the review petitions.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that CRZ Notification 1991 does not apply to backwater islands and that the island falls under CRZ IV with no restrictions.
Appellant contended that they obtained NOC and building permit before the 2011 Notification, so the 1991 Notification cannot apply.
Respondents (State and fishermen) argued that the island is within CRZ and the construction violated CRZ norms, requiring removal.
Ratio Decidendi
The CRZ Notification of 1991 applies to backwater islands, and any construction in such areas requires compliance with CRZ norms, including obtaining clearances. The doctrine of merger applies when the Supreme Court confirms a High Court judgment, barring review petitions.
Judgment Excerpts
Challenging a common order passed by the Kerala High Court... prohibiting them from carrying on the activity of development of a resort, in a backwater island namely Nediyathuruthu island...
The High Court held that both Nediyathuruthu and Vettila Thuruthu islands are backwater islands of Kerala and hence, covered by CRZ Notification of 1991.
Procedural History
The Kerala High Court disposed of seven writ petitions on 25.07.2013, allowing petitions by fishermen and a society and dismissing those by project proponents. Review petitions were dismissed on 10.12.2013. The appellant filed special leave petitions in 2013 and 2014, which were converted into civil appeals and dismissed by the Supreme Court.
Acts & Sections
- Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 1991: CRZ I, CRZ III, CRZ IV, Annexure I
- Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011:
- Constitution of India: Article 300A
- Kerala Land Conservancy Act:
