Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia & ors vs Bombay Enviornmental Action. País/Territorio India Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte superior Fecha Ene 23, 2011 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal Supreme Court of India Juez Sathasivam, P.Chauhan, B. Idioma Inglés Materia Mar, Medio ambiente gen., Tierra y suelos, Cuestiones jurídicas, Agua Palabra clave Terrenos privados Ordenación de áreas costeras Propiedad Bosques privados Derechos de propiedad Resumen On 18.2.2009 Divisional Commissioner issued notification declaring the privately owned lands from the list of 'Mangrove Areas' as "Forest" which included the lands of the appellants. In view of the said notification, the appellants could not restart the salt manufacturing. An application was filed by the appellants seeking permission to repair the damaged bund along with the impugned land. Said application was allowed by the HC vide order dated 5.2.2010 permitting the appellants to approach the District Collector for the said relief. In pursuance of the said directions the appellants approached the District Collector, who held that the appellants would repair the bund without destroying the mangroves or vegetation on the said land. Subsequently, contempt petitions had been filed by the District Collector and the respondents that under the garb of repairing the bund, the appellants had raised the height and expanded the width of the bund in such a manner that mangrove would die a natural death without any attempt on the part of the appellants, and further that appellants had destroyed the mangroves to a great extent. This contempt petition has been filed by the appellants to initiate contempt proceedings against the statutory authorities i.e. District Collector of Mumbai Suburban District for passing the order dated 20.5.2010 appointing the Committee to examine whether the appellants had violated the conditional order dated 27.1.2010 permitting the appellants to repair the bund in such a way that the mangroves may not die and order dated 26.5.2010 to ensure the compliance of the order dated 27.1.2010 and to remove the debris and reduce the height of the bund etc., being in violation of orders passed by this Court in the appeal. The question is whether contempt petitions filed by the District Collector and respondents could be allowed? The Supreme Court held, the appellants were guilty of wilful defiance of the orders passed by the District Collector. It is settled legal proposition that even if an order is void, it requires to be so declared by a competent forum and it is not permissible for any person to ignore the same merely because in his opinion the order is void. Thus, even if the order/notification is void/voidable, the party aggrieved by the same cannot decide that the said order/notification is not binding upon it. It has to approach the court for seeking such declaration. The order may be hypothetically a nullity and even if its invalidity is challenged before the court in a given circumstance, the court may refuse to quash the same on various grounds including the standing of the petitioner or on the ground of delay or on the doctrine of waiver or any other legal reason. The order may be void for one purpose or for one person, it may not be so for another purpose or another person. Various reports submitted to authorities concerned showing flagrant violations of conditional order by appellants. They had knowingly and purposely damaged the mangroves and other vegetation of the wet land of the CRZ-I area, which could not have been disturbed. Under the garb of repairing the old bund, a sort of pukka bund using boulders, and debris had been constructed along with a huge platform, violating the norms of environmental law and in flagrant violation and utter disregard of orders passed by the District Collector. The appellants were directed to restore the height and width of the bund as it was existing prior to the order passed by the District Collector failing which the District Collector would recover the cost from the appellants as arrears of land revenue. Contempt petitions are disposed of. Texto completo COU-156286.pdf