New Delhi: The Supreme Court has given an ultimatum to the Kerala government to demolish all illegal apartments at Maradu municipality in Kerala's Ernakulam district before September 20. Delivering the order on Friday, the apex court blamed the state government for not executing its directive, issued on May 8, 2019, to demolish the apartments.
"Your state is known for not following orders of this court. We know what you are doing. We want to set a precedent now," observed Justice Arun Mishra, who headed the bench, reported Live Law.
Beleaguered owners of flats at Maradu said they would file a curative petition against the order.
Speaking to the media here, E. Antony, an advocate and resident of one of the flats, said he would explore other legal remedies. "We will soon file a curative petition as we (flat owners) have not been heard. Only the builders have been heard. There still exists legal remedy and will be doing that," said Antony.
A curative petition is the last resort of corrective measure which can be pleaded for in any judgment or decision passed by the Supreme Court. It is usually submitted after the rejection of the review petition.
Meanwhile, Minister of State for Local Self Government in Kerala A.C. Moideen said the state government would seek legal advice. "Am yet to get a copy of the apex court order and we will seek legal advice on what has happened today," said Moideen.
The bench asked the government to file a compliance report by September 20, failing which the Chief Secretary will have to appear before the court on September 23.
Earlier, the court came down heavily on the petitioners and their senior counsel for playing a 'fraud on the court' in the Maradu demolition case.
On May 8, the Supreme Court ordered the demolition of 350 flats, which were built violating the coastal zone regulations in Maradu municipality within one month. The flats were located in Alfa Ventures twin complex at Nettoor, Holy Faith H2O at Kundannoor, Holiday Heritage, Jain Coral Cove at Kettezhath Kadavu, Nettoor and Golden Kayaloram.
The flats were built in an area where stringent CRZ-3 (Coastal regulation zone) laws were in place. The erstwhile Maradu panchayat (which later became a municipality) had granted permission for the construction in 2006-07 without informing the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority.
The Supreme Court took action based on the rule that no constructions should be carried out within 200m from the coast in areas where CRZ-3 regulations are in place.
On July 11, the apex court had rejected all four review petitions filed by the flat builders.
'Find a graveyard to bury us all'
Many flat owners threatened to commit suicide in the wake of Friday's Supreme Court ultimatum.
“Find a graveyard to bury us,” said Beyoj Themmatt, who is a small-scale industrialist. He bought the apartment at Holy Faith H2O for Rs 65 lakhs in 2009. “We have no other option but to commit suicide. I have not repaid the housing loan. Government will have to drive the earth-movers over our dead bodies. If I lose this apartment, I will be forced to live on the streets, repaying the loan of a demolished house,” he said.
Josemon K Pallan, another flat owner of Holy Faith H2O, too threatened to commit suicide. “I will jump to the lake, along with my wife and children, on getting the first glimpse of an earth mover near my flat,” he said. “Government will have to answer the suicide notes of hundreds of people if it decides to implement the Supreme Court order,” he said.
A nurse (name withheld to protect identity) working in Kuwait said the government has to make arrangements to bring her body to Kerala. “The flat is my saving of an entire lifetime,” she said.
Meanwhile, Maradu municipality spokesperson Boban requested the government to intervene and find a solution to the issue. “The government should act now,” he said.
CRZ-3 Zone
The government had restricted construction within 200 metres from the coasts in areas that come under the CRZ-3 category. Any form of construction in this belt needs the clearance of Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority.
Kerala High Court's single bench had quashed a notice by the municipality that sought to cancel the permission for construction.
The High Court had ruled that the municipality was solely responsible for the illegal construction and those who got the permission cannot be deemed as guilty.
However, the municipality contended in the SC that the panchayat secretary and the builders had colluded to carry out the construction. The panchayat secretary had since been removed from the service, the municipality pleaded in the court.
The SC also considered a report submitted by a court-appointed panel, including the district collector and municipal secretary, before quashing the High Court order. The court agreed to the argument that when the approval for the construction was given the area was in CRZ-3.
