IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21527 of 2010(S) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- THE CHAIRMAN VEMBANATTUKAYAL SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI, PERUMBALAM PO, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT(TAVAMANOY K,AGED 44 YEARS,S/O.KUNJUPILLAI RESIDING AT CHALIL HOUSE, PERUMBALAM PO, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN-688 570 BY ADV. SRI.A.G.BASIL RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 688 005. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT- 688 005. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT- 688 005. 4. THE GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA- 688 005. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRREGATION DEPARTMENT, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA- 688 005. 6. THE SECRETARY, KERALA SHIPPING AND INDLAND NAVIGATION CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM- 682 030. 7. THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 587. R1 TO R5 & R7 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLADER, SRI. BENNY GERVASIS. R6 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.V.J.MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.N.Ravindran, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.21527 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Ravindran, J. The Chairman of the Vembanattukayal Samrakishana Samithi, Perumbalam has filed this writ petition purportedly in public interest seeking the following reliefs: “For these and other grounds to be urged at the time of final hearing, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: i) Direct the 1st respondent to make immediate action on Ext.P1 representation. ii) Direct the respondents to take urgent action in accordance with rules and act of Kerala protection for River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 in the present issue also. iii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling the respondents to curb the unauthorized dredging going on in the Vembanadu Kayal adjacent to the Perumbalam Island and direct the respondents not to transport the Kayal sand WP(C) No.21527 of 2010 - 2 - away from the Perumbalam Island. iv) Issue such other orders as deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case including the cost of the petitioner.” 2. The pleadings disclose that pursuant to the request made by the petitioner organization, the Government had taken steps to deepen the boat channel to facilitate berthing of boats in the various boat jetties in Perumbalam Island. The said work was entrusted with the Kerala Shipping and Inland Navigation Corporation by the Government of Kerala as per Ext.R6(A) Government order dated 16.2.2010. The said authority in turn o awarded the work after inviting tenders to Sree Narayana Constructions Private Limited, Kollam. Under the terms of the agreement entered into between the 6th respondent and the said agency, the dredged materials including sand will be the property of the contractor who has to get permission of the local authority concerned to remove the sand obtained on dredging. The 6th respondent has along with his counter affidavit produced documents in support of the said statement and also a WP(C) No.21527 of 2010 - 3 - copy of the resolution adopted by the Perumbalam Grama Panchayat on 10.6.2010 permitting Sree Narayana Constructions Private Limited, Kollam to remove the sand obtained after dredging subject to the terms of the agreement to be entered into between the parties. 3. The main contention of Sri.A.G.Basil, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the islanders have a right to purchase the sand and therefore the sand should not be transported elsewhere. We are afraid there is no merit in the said contention. It was pursuant to the request made by the petitioner's organization that the Government took steps to deepen the boat channel. The work was awarded to the 6th respondent Corporation without any fetter on the right of the Corporation to sub-contract the work. The work was accordingly sub-contracted to Sree Narayana Constructions Private Limited, Kollam subject to the condition that the dredged materials will be the property of the contractor. The only restriction on the right of the contractor to remove the WP(C) No.21527 of 2010 - 4 - dredged materials was that he should obtain the clearance from the local authority, namely the Perumbalam Grama Panchayat for removal of the sand obtained after dredging. Such permission was also obtained. In such circumstances, we find no merit in the claim of the petitioner that the dredged materials have to be sold to the islanders or the members of the petitioner's samithi or to anyone nominated by them. It is for the Government and the 6th respondent to decide the terms on which the dredged materials have to be disposed of. In the absence of any right in the petitioner's samithi or its members, we find no grounds to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. . J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.N.Ravindran, Judge vns