Supreme Court Upholds Demolition of Maradu Flats, Cites KCZMP Violation

Extracted Article Body:

The Supreme Court has declared in a recent verdict that the development plan under the Maradu flats demolition case was not in line with the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Plan (KCZMP). The court observed that the failure of the authorities to ensure the implementation of KCZMP was the main reason behind the illegal construction of the high-rise buildings. The case was centred around the four apartment complexes in Kochi's Maradu municipality that were declared illegal by the Kerala High Court in May 2019 for violating the Coast Zone Regulation (CRZ) norms.

The apex court bench consisting of Justices Arun Mishra and S Ravindra Bhat made the decision based on the report submitted by the three-member committee, headed by retired Justice Balakrishnan Nair, that was appointed by the court to investigate the issue of illegal construction. The report revealed that the Maradu municipality had approved and issued building permits for the construction of four buildings namely – Golden Kayaloram, Golden Crest, Holy Faith H2O, and Jains Coral Cove. The court found that these permits were issued without obtaining approvals from the Coastal Zone Management Authority.

The court also highlighted the fact that the approvals were granted without seeking the opinion of the State Coastal Zone Management Authority (SCZMA) and the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). Furthermore, the authorities failed to take into consideration the fact that the subject land was under CRZ-IIA, where the construction of high rise buildings is restricted.

The bench further pointed out that the development plan for the Maradu municipality was "highly lacking", as it had only one single line noting the existence of CRZ, without any mention of CRZ-IIA. The SCZMA and SEIAA had also not taken any measures to identify the land that came under CRZ-IIA and prepare a map for it.

The court also noted that the crisis was exacerbated due to the failure of the lawyers from the municipal authorities to submit details of wetlands to the court constructively. It has impliedly warned them of action if they failed to comply with the court's directions, along with the consequence of court intervention in such matters in future.

The apex court also observed that the municipality knew about the illegality of the construction but could not do anything to stop it. The leaders failed to report any illegal activities based on the project applications and initiated the impugned actions, which were contrary to statutory requirements under the Coastal Zone Management Plan. The builders were granted permission to construct buildings that were in violation of the KCZMP and CRZ Zone Regulation norms which was actively supported by the municipality.

The court stated that construction of such buildings in violation of KCZMP plans is null and void and cancelled the same. The court stressed that the state government and municipality officials should have been more vigilant while granting approvals.

The Supreme Court ultimately ordered the concerned authorities, including the Ministry of Environment and Forests and Municipal Secretary, to pay a fine of Rs. 1 crore as compensation to the home buyers within a month. The original petitioner, Assisi Colony Resident's Association, and innocent members of the public who had purchased flats in the buildings were also granted permission to present their claims before the Collector.

The Balakrishnan Nair committee recommendation states that the state government has to demolish the four buildings; the cost of which is estimated to be around Rs. 240 crores. The court ordered the remaining amount, which was not paid to the home buyers, along with the interest to be refunded with 12 per cent interest to the flat owners within four weeks. If the state government fails to adhere to its obligations, the penalty against the municipal secretary and collector would be increased, said the bench.

The court accepted the recommendations of the Nair committee, directing the municipal secretary to secure the amount paid by the flat owners after executing the recoveries from the erring officials due to their negligence in their duties. The bench further directed that the state government and secretary of the municipality should cooperate with the Nair committee in its functioning so that the justice is served and compensation is paid to rightful owners.

The court also added that future development plans must include relevant information such as CRZ maps. The court directed the Environment Department to oversee the preparation of the state's Coastal Zone Management Plan within six months, which needs to be updated every ten years.

The apex court is consistent in its stand that entrepreneurs, who have money to make investments, should not be allowed to compromise the safety and security of the public at large. The verdict was a welcome move on the disposal of criminality and misusing of positions by officials in the construction industry. It will have far-reaching implications and serve as a reminder that no one should be above the law.

##Rewritten Article:

The Supreme Court, in a recent judgement, has ruled that the development plan adopted for the Maradu flats demolition case was not in accordance with the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Plan (KCZMP). It was observed that the authorities' failure to enforce the KCZMP was the primary reason behind the illegal construction of high-rise buildings. The case revolved around four apartment complexes in the Maradu municipality of Kochi which were deemed illegal by the Kerala High Court in May 2019 for not adhering to the Coastal Zone Regulation (CRZ) norms.

The bench of Justices Arun Mishra and S Ravindra Bhat reached this decision based on a report submitted by a committee headed by retired Justice Balakrishnan Nair. The committee, appointed by the court to investigate the issue of illegal construction, found that the Maradu municipality had granted building permits for the construction of four buildings, namely – Golden Kayaloram, Golden Crest, Holy Faith H2O, and Jains Coral Cove, without obtaining approvals from the Coastal Zone Management Authority.

The court further noted that these approvals were granted without seeking the opinion of the State Coastal Zone Management Authority (SCZMA) and the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). Moreover, the authorities also failed to take into consideration that the land in question was under CRZ-IIA, where the construction of high-rise buildings is prohibited.

The bench emphasized that the development plan for the Maradu municipality was severely lacking as it had only one line mentioning the existence of CRZ with no mention of CRZ-IIA. Furthermore, the SCZMA and SEIAA had failed to identify and map the land under CRZ-IIA.

The court also chastised the lawyers representing the municipal authorities for not presenting the details of the wetlands in a constructive manner. It has indirectly warned them of consequences if they fail to comply with the court's directions, making it clear that the court will intervene in such matters in the future.

The apex court further noted that the municipality was aware of the illegality of the construction but failed to take any action to stop it. The leaders failed to report any illegal activities based on the project applications and resorted to actions that were not in compliance with the statutory requirements under the Coastal Zone Management Plan. The builders were granted permission to construct buildings that violated the KCZMP and the CRZ norms with the support of the municipal authorities.

The court declared that any construction in violation of the KCZMP is null and void and ordered the cancellation of the building permits for the said structures. It also stressed that the state government and municipal officials should have been more alert while granting approvals.

The Supreme Court then directed the authorities, including the Ministry of Environment and Forests and the Municipal Secretary, to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 crore to the affected home buyers within a month. The original petitioner, Assisi Colony Resident's Association, and other members of the public who had purchased flats in these buildings were also allowed to make their claims before the Collector.

According to the recommendations of the Balakrishnan Nair committee, the state government would have to demolish the four buildings, which is estimated to cost around Rs. 240 crores. The court ordered the remaining amount, which was not paid to the home buyers, along with interest, to be refunded to the flat owners with 12% interest within four weeks. If the state government fails to comply with these orders, the penalty imposed on the municipal secretary and collector would be increased, the bench stated.

The court has also accepted the recommendations of the Nair committee and directed the municipal secretary to collect the amount paid by the flat owners from the officials responsible for their negligent conduct. The bench further directed the state government and the municipal secretary to cooperate with the Nair committee to ensure that justice is served and rightful compensation is paid to the owners.

The court also emphasized that future development plans must include crucial information such as CRZ maps. It has directed the Environment Department to oversee the preparation of the state's Coastal Zone Management Plan within six months, which must be updated every ten years.

The Supreme Court's stance is clear – no person should be allowed to compromise the safety and security of the public at large in pursuit of their investments. This verdict has been a welcomed measure to curb criminal activities and misuse of power by officials in the construction industry. It will have far-reaching implications and serve as a reminder that everyone is subject to the law.