“The ecological impact of the activity cannot be lost sight of and deserves to be taken heed of, especially since the area falls within the jurisdictional ambit of the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority,” the order said.
Making it clear that environmental concerns cannot be brushed aside in the name of flood mitigation, the court said that the forest authorities had warned that damage to sea turtle nesting grounds at Thottappally posed a “clear and present danger” to these protected species.
Background
The case originated from an order issued by the Alappuzha district collector, acting as chairman of the District Disaster Management Authority, under Section 30 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
The order allowed removal of sand, soil and casuarina trees from the Thottappally Spillway to ensure the free flow of floodwater from the Pampa, Manimala and Achenkovil rivers into the Arabian Sea.
The state justified the move as a flood-mitigation measure aimed at preventing recurring floods in the Kuttanad region.
Story continues below this ad
According to the authorities, sand accumulation and vegetation growth inside the spillway obstructed water flow and reduced the effectiveness of the spillway during monsoons.
However, environmental groups and local residents approached the court, contending that the spillway area forms part of a sensitive coastal ecosystem and is also a recognised turtle nesting ground.
Argument
While the state defended the move as a necessary disaster-management exercise, the petitioners contended that the sand removal was not a one-time emergency step but an annual activity that had caused serious ecological harm.
They alleged that what was presented as flood control had, in effect, turned into systematic sand mining.
Story continues below this ad
According to the petitioners, the spillway and adjoining beach fall within a highly sensitive coastal regulation zone and are recognised turtle nesting grounds.
Endangered species such as the Olive Ridley and Hawksbill turtles use the area for nesting, and any disturbance to the beach and sand profile directly threatens their survival.
The court examined reports filed by the forest department and the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority, which confirmed that years of sand removal had disturbed the natural beach landscape.
The reports noted the formation of troughs and depressions, increased erosion, and damage to areas critical for turtle nesting.
Story continues below this ad
Findings
The bench said that decisions on the quantity of sand to be removed each year were taken mainly from an engineering and flood-control perspective but no ecological impact study was conducted before allowing the activity, and no ecology expert was involved in the decision-making or monitoring process.
Although the Disaster Management Act empowers the district collector to order such measures, the bench stressed that the manner in which these powers are exercised must be environmentally sustainable and legally compliant.
To strike a balance between flood control and environmental protection, the court directed the chief secretary of Kerala to constitute a multi-departmental committee within two months.
The committee will be headed by the Alappuzha district collector and will include senior officials from the irrigation and water resources department, forest and wildlife department, Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority, local panchayats, and a representative of a local NGO with environmental expertise.
Story continues below this ad
The court ordered that any future removal of sand or soil from the Thottappally Spillway must be carried out only after obtaining inputs from this committee and after assessing the ecological and environmental impact.
With these directions, the writ petitions were disposed of, with the court making it clear that flood-control measures cannot be allowed to turn into routine mining activities at the cost of fragile coastal ecosystems and endangered wildlife.
