The Supreme Court of India recently criticized the Kerala government for withholding a file from the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) [TN Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union Of India & Ors.].
The CEC, established under the Environment Protection Act, is responsible for ensuring compliance with judicial orders related to ecological matters and advising State and Central governments on better implementation of such orders.
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra, and KV Viswanathan emphasized that the CEC, now a statutorily recognized body following a Court order, plays a crucial role in assisting the Court. Withholding files from the CEC, the Court noted, undermines its authority and obstructs the CEC’s ability to fulfill its duties.
“The CEC, originally constituted under the order of this Court, has now received statutory recognition via a notification dated September 5, 2023. This statutory status was granted in accordance with directions issued by this Court. The CEC is therefore discharging its duties to assist the Court in matters related to the TN Godavarman Thirumulpad case. All authorities are bound to assist the CEC during its inquiries. An attempt to withhold an important file, in our view, undermines the authority of this Court and hinders the CEC in fulfilling its duty to assist the Court,” the Court stated.
In April of this year, the Supreme Court had directed the Kerala government to file an affidavit detailing the exact area of the Cardamom Hill Reserve in Munnar. However, on July 21, Senior Advocate PV Dinesh, representing the Kerala government, informed the Court that due to elections and the extensive records to be reviewed, the State was unable to comply and requested an additional four months to complete the task. The Court, however, expressed its unwillingness to grant this extension.
It also noted that Land Revenue Commissioner Dr. A Kowsigan and Additional Secretary TR Jayapal had communicated to the CEC that the State Government would be unable to provide a requested file on the same issue.
In response, the Court ordered the two officials to personally appear before it on August 21 to explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against them.
This order was issued in response to pleas where the CEC had been updating the Bench on efforts to address issues such as encroachment removal, implementation of working plans, compensatory afforestation, plantation, and other conservation matters related to the protection of forest resources across the country.
Regarding a separate case in Delhi, the Court noted that two Benches were handling land allotment issues in the protected area of the Delhi Ridge. To avoid conflicting orders, the Court directed the Registry to place all Delhi Ridge-related matters before the Chief Justice of India for assignment to a single bench.
The Court also granted the High Powered Technical Committee, established in response to earlier orders, six months to identify areas outside the Delhi Ridge with similar morphological features to the notified ridge area.
The matter is scheduled for further consideration on August 21.
Senior Advocate PV Dinesh and advocate Nishe Rajan Shonker represented the State, while Senior Advocate Raghenth Basant and advocate A Karthik appeared for the applicant, One Earth One Life. Advocate K Parameshwar served as Amicus Curiae.
