പഞ്ചായത്ത് ട്രൈബ്യൂണലിൻ്റെ ഉത്തരവിനെ കോടതിയിൽ ചലഞ്ച് ചെയ്തു

പഞ്ചായത്ത് ട്രൈബ്യൂണലിൻ്റെ ഉത്തരവിനെ കോടതിയിൽ ചലഞ്ച് ചെയ്തു.... Building Permit കൊടുക്കാൻ പറഞ്ഞ ട്രൈബ്യൂണലിനെ Environmental & Wetland ആങ്കിളിൽ പണി കൊടുത്തു.
 ഇതിന് WP(C) No. 230/2001 എന്ന Supreme Court Caseനെ ഉപയോഗിച്ചു Wetland Notification 2017-ന് പ്രധാന്യം കൊണ്ട് വന്നു. അങ്ങനെയാണ് SWAK ഇതിൽ വന്ന് പെട്ടത്
Case Summary of WP(C) No.  6914/2012 - Kalliyoor Grama Panchayath Vs. Sherin Hafeez & Others.
Petitioner:
Kalliyoor Grama Panchayat, represented by its Secretary.
Advocate for the Petitioner: Sri. R. Gopan
The petitioner Panchayat approached the Kerala High Court challenging orders from the Tribunal for Local Self-Government Institutions that directed them to approve or renew building permits near Vellayani Lake.
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Main Respondents:
Sherin Hafees (Wife of Hafees) - Primary Respondent in WP(C) No. 6914/2012
Applied for a building permit in Survey Nos. 521/2,3,4,5,5-1,6,6-1,7,8,16 & 17 of Kalliyoor Village.
The Panchayat initially granted the permit (2008), but later refused renewal (2011), citing new environmental restrictions.
She challenged this permit denial before the Tribunal, which ruled in her favor.
M. Benoy - Respondent in WP(C) No. 28123/2014 & WP(C) No. 30616/2014
Owned 12 Ares of land in Re-Survey No. 578/14 of Kalliyoor Village.
Applied for building and compound wall permits, which were rejected by the Panchayat, citing distance rules (50 meters from lake).
He appealed to the Tribunal, which directed the Panchayat to fix the lakes boundary before rejecting permits.
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Other Respondents & Authorities Involved:
Government of Kerala (Environment Department) - Additional Respondent 2
Central Wetlands Regulatory Authority - Additional Respondent 3
State Wetland Authority of Kerala (SWAK) - Additional Respondent 4
These agencies were involved in determining the legal wetland status of Vellayani Lake.
The Kerala Government was also responsible for monitoring environmental compliance.
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Brief Case History
1. Initially, building permits were granted near Vellayani Lake.
2. Later, the Panchayat rejected permit renewals, citing the Wetland Rules, 2010 & 2017.
3. The affected landowners appealed to the Tribunal, which ruled in their favor, directing the Panchayat to approve permits.
4. The Panchayat challenged the Tribunals ruling in the High Court, arguing that Vellayani Lake is a protected wetland, and no construction can happen within 50 meters.
5. The High Court ruled that SWAK must first officially demarcate the lake boundary before deciding on construction restrictions.
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Kerala High Courts Findings on Violations
1. *The court noted that the proposed construction sites were within 50 meters of the lake, violating Rule 4(vi) of the Wetland Rules, 2017, which prohibits permanent structures within 50 meters of the mean high flood level.*
2. *The court found that the Panchayat and SWAK had failed to officially demarcate the lake boundary, leading to confusion over where construction was legally permitted.*
3. *The court acknowledged that encroachments and unregulated construction posed a threat to the ecosystem of Vellayani Lake, which is a source of drinking water for Thiruvananthapuram, Vizhinjam, and nearby areas.*
4. *The State Government, Revenue Department, and SWAK had delayed the notification of Vellayani Lake as a wetland, allowing legal disputes to continue without clear regulations.*
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Role of Petitioners' Advocates
*Sri. R. Gopan (Advocate for Kalliyoor Grama Panchayat)*
Argued that Vellayani Lake was a protected wetland and that building near the lake violated environmental laws.
Stressed that the Tribunals order should not have directed permit approvals before the lake boundary was properly marked.
*Sri. Abdul Razak & Sri. T.U. Ziyad (Advocates for Respondents - Landowners)*
Argued that the permit denials were unfair, as the owners had legally acquired their land.
Contended that the delay in marking the wetland boundary should not indefinitely block their property rights.
*Government Advocates*
Represented the Kerala Government, SWAK, and the Central Wetlands Regulatory Authority.
Defended the application of Wetland Rules, 2017 and the need to protect Vellayani Lake.
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Other Cases Referred in This Judgment
M.K. Balakrishnan & Others v. Union of India (WP(C) No. 230/2001)
A Supreme Court case on wetland protection.
The SC ordered protection of 2,01,503 wetlands across India, including Vellayani Lake.
Dharmadom Paristhithi Samrakshana Samithi v. Dharmadom Grama Panchayat (2010 (2) KLT 194)
Related to environmental regulations in local bodies.
The court emphasized the need to follow wetland conservation laws.
Manubhai Sendhabhai Bharwad v. ONGC Ltd. (2023 SCC OnLine SC 63)
A case that reinforced the importance of protecting landowners rights.
The court ruled that landowners should not be indefinitely deprived of property use due to government inaction.
Jose Thomas Pattara v. Uzhavoor Grama Panchayat (2022 (5) KLT 100)
Concerned illegal restrictions imposed by Panchayats.
The court ruled that a Panchayat cannot impose building restrictions beyond what is legally mandated.
Sasidharan v. State of Kerala (2010 (3) KLT 16)
Discussed government duties in wetland conservation.
The court stressed that failure to survey and notify wetlands in time can lead to legal confusion.
[14/02, 17:39] EPRC-keralamyowncountry: Final Judgment and Impact
 SWAK must complete the wetland demarcation within three months per Supreme Court orders.
 Until SWAK finalizes the lake boundary, the Tribunals order for permit renewals is on hold.
 After demarcation, LSGD and the Panchayat must act as per wetland regulations.
Impact of the Judgment
*Strict enforcement of wetland conservation laws to protect Vellayani Lake from encroachments.*
*Holds government agencies accountable for timely demarcation of protected areas.*
*Landowners must wait for final wetland notification before getting permits.*
*Ensures sustainable environmental practices while considering property rights.*