The Kerala High Court has issued a sharp directive to the state government, demanding a clear explanation by Tuesday for its failure to establish a crucial management committee for the ecologically sensitive Ashtamudi wetland in Kollam. The court is hearing a contempt petition alleging blatant non-compliance with its earlier order.
Court's Stern Warning on Contempt
A bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice V M Syam Kumar heard the contempt petition filed by Kollam-based lawyer Boris Paul. The court orally observed that the government's inaction presented a clear case of contempt. The judges pointed out that the state government itself had originally proposed the composition of the Ashtamudi wetland management unit.
The controversy stems from a June order where the High Court, in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Paul, directed the state to constitute the management unit within two months. This body was tasked with the conservation and effective management of the wetland, a designated Ramsar site of international importance. The court had also mandated the unit to formulate a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) covering its functioning, meeting schedules, and operational details.
Six Months of Inaction and Environmental Damage
Despite the clear judicial directive, no action has been taken by the state government even after six months. This prolonged delay prompted Paul to file the contempt petition. In his plea, the lawyer highlighted the ongoing degradation of the Ashtamudi wetland ecosystem due to multiple threats.
The key factors causing depletion include drainage pollution and rampant encroachments. The continued deterioration of this vital water body, which supports local biodiversity and livelihoods, formed the core of the petitioner's argument for urgent intervention.
Government's Plea for More Time Rejected
During the hearing on Monday, the government pleader representing the state submitted that the file concerning the management unit was currently pending with the finance department. Seeking additional time to obtain instructions, the plea was effectively countered by the court's insistence on a concrete reply.
The bench, unimpressed by the delay, adjourned the matter to Tuesday, specifically for a definitive response from the state government. The court has made it clear that it expects compliance with its June order and will not tolerate further excuses.
The case underscores a critical conflict between judicial mandates for environmental protection and administrative delays. The fate of the Ashtamudi wetland now hinges on the state government's response to the High Court's deadline.
