A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court on Tuesday directed the Greater Cochin Development Authority (GCD) to get necessary certification from the Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority (KCZMA) that the areas where the GCDA proposed to construct a new bridge at Panampilly Nagar did not come under the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) before going ahead with the proposed construction.
The GCDA proposes to construct a bridge over the Perandoor Canal at Panampilly Nagar linking Girinagar 4th Cross Road with the Panampilly Nagar Elders’ Forum Road.
The Bench comprising Chief Justice Ashok Bhutan and Justice A.M. Shaffique also ordered that the GCDA and Kochi Corporation should ensure that the construction did not violate the Elamkulam West Detailed Town Planning (DTP) scheme. Disposing of a writ petition, the court observed that it was for the Corporation and the GCDA to consider whether the construction of the bridge would be contrary to the DTP scheme. The petitioner contended that the new bridge was likely to create traffic blocks and was unlikely to be used by any genuine road user.
The entire length of the canal was included in the Detailed Town Planning Scheme for Elamkulam west, and there was only provision for one bridge across the canal. The bridge construction was in violation of the scheme.
The GCDA submitted that the area did not come under the CRZ. It had not violated the town planning scheme and the construction of the bridge was to enable the people in the locality easy access from one part of the canal to the other.
The present bridge was not sufficient for the movement of vehicles. The bridge was proposed at the instance of the people in the locality. Temporary filling had been made on parts of the canal and once the construction was over, there would be free flow of water.
As for the contention of the GCDA that the area did not come under the CRZ, the court said that since no material was placed on record to support it, it would not be justifiable to arrive at a conclusion.
This had to be addressed by the Coastal Zone Management Authority.
The court also made it clear that when the DTP scheme was in force, unless a modification was made in accordance with the statutory provision, it was not open for any authority to change the scheme.
