Expert Panel on Vizhinjam Coastal Erosion Was Flawed by Conflicts of Interest, Rules Kerala High Court

Expert Panel on Vizhinjam Coastal Erosion Was Flawed by Conflicts of Interest, Rules Kerala High Court in Nirmala Johny v. State of Kerala

Case: Nirmala Johny and Others v. State of Kerala and Others
Date of Judgment: 30 October 2026
Court: Kerala High Court
Coram: Justice Harisankar V. Menon
Proceedings: W.P.(C) No. 34157 of 2022

Court Observation

“This Court is of the opinion that the challenge against the constitution of the Committee pursuant to Ext.P11 Government Order and the opinion of the Committee, raised by the petitioners is only to be accepted,”

Summary

The Kerala High Court has declared flawed the constitution of the expert committee appointed by the State government to examine allegations of coastal erosion caused by the Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport, and has held that the committee’s final report, which found no coastal erosion caused by the port project, shall not be acted upon.

The Court found that the previous professional involvement of certain members with the project raised sufficient concerns about the committee’s independence. It directed the State government to constitute a fresh and independent expert committee, ensuring that its proposed members have no conflict of interest, and to take into account the observations in the judgment and the views of stakeholders.

Key Holdings

  • The inclusion of M. D. Kudale in the committee ought to have been avoided, since his previous engagement as an expert member of the technical sub-committee for the development of the Vizhinjam Seaport was not disputed.
  • The real question in such cases is whether reasonable grounds exist to believe that a person was likely to have been biased, and the possibility of conflict between personal interests and official duties must be eliminated.
  • The State, having itself constituted the committee under the Government Order of 6 October 2022 to examine the erosion allegations, could not contend that its report could simply be ignored because another monitoring committee had been constituted under National Green Tribunal directions.
  • The objection of delay and laches was rejected, since the writ petition was instituted in connection with the constitution of the very committee created by the October 2022 Government Order.

Directions Issued

  • The State government must constitute a fresh and independent expert committee to undertake the studies contemplated under the Government Order dated 6 October 2022, ensuring that the proposed members have no conflict of interest.
  • The fresh committee must be constituted after taking into account the observations in the judgment and the views of the stakeholders concerned.
  • The final report of the earlier committee shall not be acted upon.

Background

The petition was filed in 2022 by 128 residents of fishing villages within about 20 kilometres north of Vizhinjam, who alleged that construction of the seaport, particularly its breakwaters, had caused severe coastal erosion on the northern side and accretion on the southern side, resulting in loss of homes and livelihoods. The four-member committee headed by M. D. Kudale, former Additional Director of the Central Water and Power Research Station, Pune, was constituted by Government Order dated 6 October 2022 pursuant to National Green Tribunal directions. The petitioners alleged conflicts of interest arising from members’ previous professional associations with the project, including Kudale’s earlier published position that port development could disrupt longshore drift, causing accumulation on one side and erosion on the other.

Related Articles

Disclaimer: This is a summary prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should refer to the official judgment for the authoritative text.

Tags: , ,