NGT seeks clarity from T.N. govt. on sand dumping along the Adyar near Thiru. Vi. Ka. Bridge's eastern side
The direction was issued during a recent hearing in a case filed by the Ramaniyam Towers Residents' Association. The matter was originally filed in the Madras High Court as a writ petition and was later transferred to the Bench.
The residents' association has alleged that sand was being dumped under the pretext of strengthening the river bund, but in reality, it was being done to facilitate the construction of a proposed link road. The road is meant to connect Greenways Road with Durgabhai Deshmukh Road via the Tamil Nadu Music College campus.
While the State government claims that the road is essential for easing traffic congestion in the area, the applicant argues that a portion of the proposed route falls within a Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), where construction is restricted to protect the environment.
The Bench, comprising Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana and expert member Satyagopal Korlapati, said the Madras High Court had earlier ordered status quo on the CRZ stretch, and this order would continue to remain in effect. At the same time, it clarified that the government was free to carry on with other parts of the road project that did not fall within the CRZ or on the disputed riverbank area.
The Bench also asked the State Highways Department to examine the possibility of realigning the road through the premises of Dr. M.G.R. Janaki College of Arts and Science. It observed that if the road was built entirely within the college compound, the residents would likely have no further objections.
The WRD has also been asked to clearly state whether the sand dumping was being done solely for strengthening the river bund or if it also serves the road construction. Until this is explained, no work can be carried out on the affected stretch along the river, the Bench added, and posted the matter for further hearing on July 30.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
19 hours ago
- The Hindu
Capt. Chowta accuses Karnataka govt. of delaying dedicated jetty project for Lakshadweep
MP for Dakshina Kannada Capt. Brijesh Chowta has charged the State government of delaying the execution of the dedicated jetty project for Lakshadweep at the Old Mangaluru Port that was sanctioned under the Central government's flagship Sagarmala scheme. His statement comes after the Union Ministry of Ports, Shipping, and Waterways categorised the ₹65-crore project under the 'deemed deferred category', because of the inordinate delay as informed by Minister Sarbananda Sonowal in December last year. Raising the issue under Rule 377 in the Lok Sabha on Friday, Capt. Chowta said the project was part of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's larger vision of port-led development under the Sagarmala scheme, which has brought much-needed attention and investment to India's coastal infrastructure and maritime connectivity. He said the Lakshadweep jetty project was announced under the Sagarmala Phase I on July 20, 2022. The then BJP government in Karnataka took up the matter on a priority basis, issued tenders in August and December 2022 and January 2023. The contract was awarded on March 29, 2023. Environmental clearance Capt. Chowta further said, 'However, since the Congress government came to power in May 2023, the project has seen little to no movement. Its importance has been diluted, and progress stalled.' He said that he had raised the issue during the Winter Session of 2024 and only after continued follow ups did the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) clearance is granted on February 27 by the Karnataka Coastal Zone Management Authority. Even now, while the project was taken up by the State Expert Appraisal Committee on June 20, the environmental clearance remains pending, and the file continues to be held up in the State system. Capt. Chowta also highlighted the issue of dredging, which is essential for the jetty's operational success. Though a dredging contract was awarded with seven-year validity, the agency concerned failed to maintain the required draft or carry out timely dredging, leading to recurring problems, especially during monsoons. He said that he had raised the issue in the recent DISHA meeting, along with MLA for Mangaluru City South D. Vedavyasa Kamath, urging the State government to expedite the works. Maritime corridor Seeking intervention of the Union Ministry of Ports, Shipping, and Waterways in expediting the work, Capt. Chowta said the project is not just about connectivity - it holds strategic importance for coastal security, for strengthening the Lakshadweep–Mangaluru maritime corridor, and for boosting economic activity in the region.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
PAP Canal tail-end farmers reject WRD claim of equitable water distribution, Tiruppur Collector assures elaborate discussion on the issue
Farmers in the tail-end of PAP (Parambikulam Aliyar Project) canal who have been complaining of uneven distribution of water have rejected the contention of the Water Resources Department (WRD) denying the charge. The tail-end farmers have conveyed to the WRD instances of coconut trees withering away in the fourth zone despite abundance water availability in the PAP system dams. In a petition submitted to the department's Aliyar Basin Division, Pollachi, P. Velusamy, president of PAP Vellakovil Branch Canal Water Conservation Association said that the reading at the Andipalayam zero point implies that Pongalur sub-division receives receives nearly three times more water than the Kangeyam sub-division in equal irrigation area. The imbalance undermines the equitable principles outlined in Act 20 of 1993 and reinforced by several directions issued by the Madras High Court, Mr. Velusamy said. In his petition, he sought in writing from the Executive Engineer, Aliyar Basin Division, WRD, the purported stand of the department that intervention (in water distribution) could be authorised only by the Chairperson of PAP Project Committee, and not at the departmental or field level. In his reply, R. Narendiren, Executive Engineer, WRD, Aliyar Basin Division, Pollachi, cited the statement of the president of Distributory Committee No. 6 that has jurisdiction over Pongalur Sub-Division to deny the charge of uneven water distribution. The president of the Distributory Committee No. 6 had stated that there was equitable distribution of water under the jurisdiction of Pongalur sub-division and that water was distributed in equitable manner up to tail end under Participatory Irrigation Management. The statement also claimed that right quantity of water was made available at Vellakoil Branch Canal at zero point. The onus was on the Distributory Committee No. 8 of Kangayam area to distribute available water at zero point of Vellakoil Branch Canal that runs to a length of 27.6 km among the farmers as per the Tamil Nadu Farmers Management Irrigation System Act 2000 under participatory irrigation management. During the discussion at the farmers' grievance redressal meeting on Friday, District Collector Manish S. Narnaware said an elaborate discussion on PAP water distribution will be conducted next week, to arrive at a solution.
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- New Indian Express
Cash recovery case: SC to hear Justice Varma's plea against in-house committee report on July 28
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Monday, July 28, the appeal filed by Justice Yashwant Varma, challenging the in-house committee probe report that indicted him over the recovery of a huge sum of unaccounted cash at his official residence in Delhi. According to the causelist uploaded on the apex court's website, a two-judge Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih will hear Justice Varma's appeal. The hearing assumes great significance, considering the fact that the impeachment process have already been initiated in Parliament for his alleged misconduct in connection with the recovery of cash. On July 17, Justice Varma filed an appeal before the top court challenging the in-house committee report that found him guilty of misconduct. He contended that the mere recovery of cash from the outhouse of his official residence did not establish his culpability. Subsequently, on July 23, he mentioned the matter before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai, seeking an early hearing. The Supreme Court agreed to list the matter. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Justice Varma, submitted before the CJI-led three-judge Bench that the matter involved important constitutional questions. The CJI assured him that an appropriate Bench would be constituted to hear the matter but recused himself, citing his prior involvement in internal discussions related to the case. 'I think it will not be proper for me to take up that matter because I was a part of that conversation,' the CJI said.
