In this PIL, the petitioner challenged a Government Order regarding fund allocation and dredging work in Pallikaranai Marsh. The bench noted the petitioner's grievances were satisfactorily addressed, resulting in the disposal of the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.09.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P.No.2709 of 2021
G.Sundarrajan
..Petitioner
Vs
1.Union of India,
rep. by the Secretary,
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change,
'Parayavaran Bhavan',
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi – 110 003.
2.State of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by the Principal Secretary to Government,
Environment and Forests (FR.5) Department,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
3.Conservation Authority of Pallikaranai Marsh Land,
rep. by the Member Secretary,
Office of the Conservator of Forests, Chennai Circle
259, Anna Salai, DMS Complex,
Teynampet, Chennai – 600 006.
4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
and Chief Wildlife Warden,
Panagal Maaligai,
1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet,
Chennai – 600 015.
5.The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,
Chennai – 600 032...Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus
calling for the records in the order bearing No.G.O.(3D) No.29,
Environment and Forests (FR.5) Department, dated 4.9.2018 issued
by respondent No.2-State of Tamil Nadu and quash the same so far
as it relate to non-release of 20.51 crore directly to
respondent No.3 and so far as it relates to the proposal of
respondent-State of Tamil Nadu to commence “dredging work” in
Pallikaranai Marsh, Chennai and directing respondent No.2-State
of Tamil Nadu to release 20.51 crore to respondent No.3 for the
implementation of the Eco-restoration, Protection and
Conservation works in Pallikaranai Marsh Land and not to
undertake “dredging work” in Pallikaranai Marsh, Chennai without
proper scientific study.
For the Petitioner:Mr.M.Radhakrishnan
For the Respondents
:Mr.V.Udayakumar
for respondent No.1
: Mr.C.Harsha Raj Counsel for the State for respondent Nos.2 to 4: Ms.Shanmugavalli Sekar for respondent No.5ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by P.Audikesavalu, J.)
The Petitioner in this Public Interest Litigation seeks
to quash G.O.(3D) No.29, Environment and Forests (FR.5)
Department, dated 04.0-9.2018 issued by the Second Respondent –
Principal Secretary to Government, Environment and Forests
(FR.5) Department, State of Tamil Nadu in so far it relates to
non-release of 20.51 Crore directly to the Third Respondent –
Member Secretary, Conservation Authority of Pallikaranai Marsh
Land and to direct the Second Respondent to release 20.51 Crore
to the Third Respondent for implementation of Eco-restoration,
Protection and Conservation works in Pallikaranai Marsh Land and
also not to undertake “dredging work” in the Pallikaranai Marsh.
2. Mr. M.Radhakrishnan, Learned Counsel for the
Petitioner expresses that the complaint of the Petitioner is
two-fold.
3. The first objection is that in G.O. Ms. No. 103,
Environment and Forests (FR.5) Department, dated 31.03.2012, the
Government of Tamil Nadu had specifically mentioned that the
funds/financial assistance received from the State/Central
Government would be deposited in the bank account of the
Society, viz., Conservation Authority of Pallikaranai Marsh
Land, to be opened in a nationalized bank and utilized for
carrying out the works, but subsequently, in G.O. (3D) No. 29,
Environment and Forests (FR.5) Department, dated 04.09.2018, the
Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden
have been named as the authorities to utilize the amount of Rs.
20.30 Crore for the implementation of Comprehensive Management
Plan components like eco-restoration, protection and
conservation works in Velachery Road (657/1A) portion of
Pallikaranai Marsh land during the year 2018-2019 for the works
mentioned in the annexure to that Governmental Order. In this
regard, the Third Respondent has stated in paragraph 14 of the
Counter-Affidavit dated 30.03.2021, as follows:-
“14. ....A bank account in Punjab National Bank at
Mylapore branch in the name of CAPML (Conservation
Authority of Pallikaranai marsh land) has already been
opened and the fund Rs.20.30 Crores has also been
received directly to that account as per Government Order
No.G.O.(Ms).No.99, Environment and Forest (FR-5)
Department, Dated 17.07.2018. Further based on the
proposal received from the respondent 3, the same had
been sent to Government for approval by Respondent 4 is
one of the Member of Governing Body in CAPML.”
Having regard to that explanation, it is represented by the
Respondents that another Governmental Order would be shortly
issued confirming that all amounts to be received in future from
the State and Central Government for maintenance and other works
would be remitted into the relevant bank account in the name of
the Conservation Authority of Pallikaranai Marsh Land only.
4. The other resentment of the Petitioner is that the
Respondents are carrying out dredging work in Pallikaranai Marsh
Land, which would adversely affect the ecology. In this regard,
it is noticed from paragraphs 16 and 17 of the same Counter-
Affidavit of the Third Respondent, as extracted below:-
“16. It is respectfully submitted that the NABCONS
(NABARD Consultancy service) had prepared a Detail
Project Report (DPR) on “Improved resilience of urban eco
system to climate change through restoration of
Pallikaranai marshland” under Green Climate Fund. In the
DPR it was stated that in order to maintain the
brackishness and to maintain the water holding capacity,
the hydrodynamic studies based on the tidal boundary and
the water depth condition of the existing marshland which
suffersfromextensivesedimentation,debris,
encroachment and sewerage disposal are considered. The
study revealed that the hydrodynamic condition and
pattern differs in different locations.
In the DPR, Removal of debris and de-silting of
channels is proposed on the North side of the 200 feet
road (Velachery -Tambaram Main Road) which is to be
subjected to debris removal and desiltation to maintain
level and the encroachment area in the wetland which is
to be restored. The removal of debris was done on
Velachery – Tambaram Main Road area of Marsh to restore
the ecology of Marsh, which is as per above study
suggested.
17. It is respectfully submitted that removal of debris
has been done and shallow water habitats have been
created by in the Marsh Land. With the removed debris,
bund has been formed and along the bund walk path has
been created and the bund was strengthened and stabilized
by vegetation by planting native indigenous tree species,
shrubs and herbs. The alien and invasive species like
prosopis have been removed. The Marsh Land has been
consolidated by construction of protection barrier along
Velacherry – Tambaram main road over a length of 1700
metres. Necessary Models and Signages have been
displayed on the bund about wetlands to create awareness
about wetlands and the bio-diversity that Pallikaranai
Marsh Land supports.”
Mr. C.Harsha Raj, Learned Government Counsel appearing for the
Second to Fourth Respondents submits that dredging work had to
be carried out only for the aforesaid reasons, which has also
been completed, and he adds that there shall not be any more
dredging work in future except when such necessity arises out of
removal of any encroachments. The said statement made is placed
on record.
5. The grievances of the Petitioner have been
satisfactorily redressed and nothing remains for further
consideration in this Writ Petition.
6. In the upshot, W.P. No. 2709 of 2021 is disposed of.
W.M.P. Nos. 3040 and 3041 of 2021 are closed. There will be no
order as to costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CO)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar
bbr
To:
1.The Secretary,
Union of India,
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change,
'Parayavaran Bhavan',
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi – 110 003.
2.The Principal Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Environment and Forests (FR.5) Department,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Member Secretary,Conservation Authority of Pallikaranai Marsh Land, Office of the Conservator of Forests, Chennai Circle 259, Anna Salai, DMS Complex, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 006.4.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden,Panagal Maaligai,1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.5.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Chennai – 600 032.+1CC to Mr.V.Udayakumar, Advocate, SR.No. 48665
W.P.No.2709 of 2021
BS(CO)
B.VC (28/09/2021)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether complaints regarding non-release of funds and dredging work in Pallikaranai Marsh warrant disposal of the writ petition.
G.Sundarrajan
Union of India
State of Tamil Nadu
Conservation Authority of Pallikaranai Marsh Land
Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board
Sanjib Banerjee
P.D. Audikeshavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court