The Kerala High Court has cleared a significant hurdle for the Thrikkakara municipality in Ernakulam, allowing it to move forward with the procedural steps required to establish a municipal solid waste treatment plant. A division bench set aside an earlier interim order that had completely stalled the project.
Court Overturns Stay on Waste Processing Plant
A High Court bench comprising Justices Anil K Narendran and S Muralee Krishna has vacated an interim stay order issued by a single judge. The stay had blocked the Ernakulam district collector's permission for the municipality to use 8.50 ares of land for setting up a waste dumping and processing facility. The division bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed by the Thrikkakara municipality, which challenged the single bench's decision to halt the process.
Long-Standing Land Dispute and Contested Undertaking
The legal battle stems from a commitment made decades ago. The single judge's stay was originally granted on a petition filed by Paul Mecheril of Kakkanad and 15 other residents. They argued that back in 1999, the then Thrikkakara panchayat (which became a municipality in 2006) had given a court undertaking. This undertaking stated that it would purchase land under the Third People's Plan Programme for 1999-2000 and construct a modern garbage treatment plant and slaughterhouse within six months.
Following this, 50 cents of land was purchased in Ward 6, Vanachira. The petitioners contended that the municipality failed to honor this commitment. They opposed the current proposal to establish the plant in a different locality, claiming it violated the old undertaking.
In its defense, the municipality submitted that while the 50 cents in Vanachira were initially bought for a waste plant, the local body decided in 2015 to use that land for the Life Mission Project to build a residential complex instead.
High Court's Rationale and Conditional Permission
The division bench observed that the single judge's blanket stay order affected the substantial rights of the municipality to pursue the project. The court noted a critical procedural gap: the municipality has not yet submitted a formal proposal to the state pollution control board (PCB) to obtain the mandatory prior consent for establishing the solid waste treatment plant.
Recognizing that securing PCB consent is a time-consuming process, the High Court held that instead of imposing a complete stay, the single bench should have adopted a more balanced approach. The division bench ruled that the municipality should be allowed to continue with the process of applying for and obtaining consent from the PCB. However, this permission comes with a strict condition: no physical construction on the site can begin until the final disposal of the pending writ petition.
This order effectively allows the administrative and regulatory process to move forward while keeping the core legal dispute alive, ensuring that no irreversible action is taken until the court makes a final determination on the merits of the case.
