IN The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam
The Honourable Mr. Justice.P.K.Balasubramanyan
Tuesday, the 2nd June, 1998/12th Jyaistha, 1920.
O.P. No. 20278 of 1997-L
Petitioner:
Kaloor Joseph, Secretary
Coastal Area Protection Council,
Padapuraskal House,
Kochi - 682 017
By Adv. M/s. P.B. Sahasranaman & K. Jagadesh.
Respondents:
1. State of Kerala, represented by its Secretary, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram.
2. The Director, Department of Science and Technology & Environment, Government of Kerala, CMD Building, Thycaud, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 014.
This O.P. having been finally heared on 15-1-1998 , the court on 2-6-1998 delivered the following
Judgment
In this Original Petition filed by the petitioner claiming to be the Secretary of the Coastal Area Protection Council seeks the issue of appropriate directions to the State Government and the Director of Department of Science and Technology and Environment, Government of Kerala to make available to the public copies of the Coastal Zone Management Plan so as to enable the citizens to identify the areas falling within the protected zones and for a direction to publish in the Kerala Gazette and in the local newspapers a copy of that plan. According to the petitioner even though the States were directed to prepare the Management Plan within one year of the order in that behalf, the same has not been done. The Supreme Court had in its order dated 18.4.1996 directed the States including the State of Kerala to file their plans in that court by 30.6.1996. According to the petitioner pursuant to that direction the Management Plan was prepared by the Government of Kerala. The petitioner relies on Ext. P1, a communication issued by the Government of India to the Chief Secretary to the State directing the Government of Kerala to give wide publicity to CZMP and indicate the list of places where it is available to be inspected in support of his submissions. Ext. P1 also indicates the modifications to be made by the State Government so as to make the plan in confirmity with the requirements. The petitioner submits that the public has a right to know and the same cannot be defeated by keeping the plan unpublished and without making the copy of the plan available to the public for scrutiny. According to the petitioner the publication is necessary so as to enable organisations like the one represented by the petitioner to ensure that public interests are protected and the Coastal Regulation is fully given effect to.
2. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State or the Director. It is clear from the direction of the Supreme Court and Ext. P1 communication that the plan ought to be prepared and published or made available for inspection. A citizen has a right to know the steps taken in enforcement of the Coastal Regulation Management and is also entitled to know the areas which come under the various Zones under the Scheme of things. The State cannot refuse to make available the plan in the offices of the Local Authorities and the Public Libraries, including the Library of the High Court. The respondents are also bound to give sufficient publicity to the Coastal Zone Management Plan prepared by the State so as to enable the public to know whether there are any deficiencies in that plan and to ensure that the Coastal Zone Management Plan was properly implemented and not violated by anyone. This right of a citizen is the right to know, protected by the Constitution of India. The State cannot refuse the right of the citizen to have access to the Coastal Zone Management Plan.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the State Government is not acting properly in the matter of enforcement of the Coastal Zone Regulation and is permitting violations without reference to the object sought to be achieved by such Regulation. The learned Government Pleader controverted this submission. I do not think it necessary to go into this controversy in this Original Petition since the prayer in this Original Petition is only for compelling the respondents to publish the Coastal Zone Management Plan. If the petitioner wants to seek any general relief regarding the enforcement of the Coastal Zone Regulation, it is for him to approach this court with the necessary pleadings with reference to specific instances of what he calls violations or the failure to enforce the regulations so as to enable the State Government to meet those specific allegations and to enable this court to take proper decision on that aspect.
In the result, the Original Petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to make available in all District, Taluks and Grama Panchayat Offices, Municipal Offices, Offices of the Municipal Corporations, Taluk Offices and to all Public Libraries including the Library of the High Court of Kerala copies of the Coastal Zone Management Plan and also to publish the same in the Kerala Gazette and in two local newspapers having good circulation. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
2nd June 1998