Faecal contamination beyond permissible limits in Kadambrayar, Chitrapuzha
Faecal contamination exceeded the maximum permissible limits along the Brahmapuram and Manakkakadavu stretches of the Kadambrayar and the Irumpanam stretch of the Chitrapuzha in Ernakulam in February 2025.
While the maximum permissible limit is less than 2,500 MPN (most probable number) per 100 ml under the criteria for bathing prescribed by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), the total coliform count was 5,400 MPN/100 ml on the Brahmapuram stretch of the Kadambrayar, according to the analysis report on polluted river stretches submitted by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board (PCB) for the month of February 2025 before the Ministry of Jal Shakthi on March 24, 2025.
The analysis of water samples is done as part of the CPCB's National Water Quality Monitoring Programme. Samples are collected from fixed locations on the Manakkakadavu and Brahmapuram stretches of the Kadambrayar and the Irumpanam section along the Chitrapuzha every month as part of the monitoring programme.
The total coliform count on the Manakkakadavu stretch of the Kadambrayar was 2,700 MPN/100 ml. On the Irumpanam stretch of the Chitrapuzha, the total coliform count was 7,900 MPN/100 ml.
A report submitted by the Department of Environment dated March 17, 2025 before the Southern Bench of the National Green Tribunal had said that the pollution in the Kadambrayar was due to discharge of domestic effluents from townships and households through drains and creeks that lead to the waterbody. The discharge of leachate, if any, from the Brahmapuram plant and flow restrictions due to the growth of water hyacinths increased the severity of pollution, it said.
The report said that an action plan had been initiated to check pollution, and that it included issuing directives for setting up sewage treatment plants and imposing penalty on those found violating rules under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
13 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Slum dwellers on mangrove land not entitled to rehab, rules HC
MUMBAI: In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court on Friday held that slum dwellers who have settled on protected forests — including mangrove land and buffer zones — cannot seek rehabilitation under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. A division bench of Justice Girish S Kulkarni and Justice Advait Sethna upheld the Maharashtra government's stance that Section 3Z-6 of the Slum Act explicitly excludes forest areas from its scope. As a result, encroachments on forest land are not entitled to the protections or benefits afforded to recognised slum dwellers. The court was hearing a petition filed by four residents of Laxminagar, a settlement located within mangrove forests and buffer zones in Charkop, Kandivali. The petitioners approached the High Court through advocate Ronita Bhattacharya Bector after revenue authorities demolished around 500 huts in the area — including theirs — in April 2021. The petitioners argued that the demolition was unlawful as they had been residing there since 1980 and were therefore eligible for rehabilitation under a government resolution (GR) dated June 16, 2015. That GR protects slum dwellers who settled before January 1, 2000, by entitling them to permanent alternate accommodation. They also cited a second GR dated May 16, 2018, which extends similar benefits to those settled between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2011. However, additional government pleader Uma Palsuledesai, appearing for the state, countered that the petitioners were not entitled to any relief as they had encroached on protected mangrove land — classified as a reserved forest under Survey No. 39, spanning 57 hectares. She pointed out that Section 3Z-6 of the Slum Act expressly excludes such areas, including those falling under Coastal Regulation Zones (CRZ), from its purview. Agreeing with this submission, the bench observed, 'There is a clear exclusion for the applicability of the Slums Act set out under Section 3Z-6. The land in question falls within a protected forest. Therefore, the provisions of the Slums Act will not apply, and the petitioners cannot claim benefit as protected occupiers under the Act.' The court also noted that the area had never been formally declared a slum under the Act, and that the petitioners failed to meet the statutory definition of 'eligible slum dwellers' as laid out in Section 2(c-b) of the Act. 'This is a case where protection, relocation, and rehabilitation under Section 3Z of the Slums Act are not available to the petitioners, rendering their claim against the demolition legally untenable and unsustainable,' the court concluded, dismissing the petition.
Time of India
20 hours ago
- Time of India
BMC to mark high and low tide lines for Ganeshotsav
Mumbai: The BMC will identify and mark low tide lines (LTL) and high tide lines (HTL) and install marine navigation buoys along with mooring at low tide lines at 43 Ganesh idol immersion sites in Mumbai. The BMC is carrying out the action to adhere to guidelines for Ganesh idol immersion issued by the CPCB, which mandates that idol immersions in the sea be done between LTL and HTL. Similarly, the civic body is also inviting expressions of interest for the shortlisting of manufacturers, authorised dealers, suppliers, and distributors of eco-friendly water-based, biodegradable, and non-toxic natural dyes for idols. The list of shortlisted suppliers of natural dyes for idols will be put in the public domain for the benefit of idol makers. Naresh Dahibavkar, president of Brihanmumbai Sarvajanik Ganeshotsav Samanvay Samiti, said, "We normally appeal to the Ganpati mandals to immerse idols during low tide as they can go farther into the sea. During high tide, some remains of the idols or parts used as a base for the idols are washed ashore."
Indian Express
a day ago
- Indian Express
Vidarbha's ‘Zudpi' scrub lands are ‘forest' lands: how SC ruling has struck a balance between development and environment concerns
After several decades of litigation over about 86,000 hectares of Zudpi jungle (shrub forest) lands peculiar to Maharashtra's eastern Vidarbha region, the Supreme Court last month ruled that such lands should be considered as 'forest' lands. On May 22, the top court provided clarity on the usage of Zudpi lands, saying they cannot be converted without prior approval from the central government, and only after complying with the conditions laid down by the court. An official report referred to by the court says Zudpi is a Marathi word that literally translates to bushes or shrubs, and Zudpi land means an inferior type of unoccupied land with bushy growth. The term was used for all wastelands that were not occupied by individual farmers for cultivation and other purposes. According to the report, Zudpi jungle lands are peculiar to six districts of eastern Vidarbha (Nagpur division) – Nagpur, Chandrapur, Gadchiroli, Bhandara, Wardha, and Gondia – and have been used for non-forest purposes for the past several decades. These lands, traditionally used for grazing, were classified as Gairan under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. For decades, legal status uncertain Vidarbha's Zudpi lands remained in a legal limbo for decades due to administrative lapses, inconsistent government actions, and contrasting interpretations of India's forest laws. Initially vested with the Revenue Department, these lands were used for development, public amenities like schools, health centres, water pipelines, burial grounds, and for allotment to landless farmers. They were also used for infrastructure projects, including railways, defence, and irrigation. After the reorganisation of states in 1960, similar lands elsewhere in Maharashtra were recorded as Gairan or Gurcharan. However, in Vidarbha, they continued to be classified as 'Zudpi Jungle' due to bureaucratic inaction. The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (FCA) prohibited diversion of forest land without the Centre's approval. However, in November 1987, the Maharashtra government issued an order declaring Zudpi lands as 'scrub forests' that would not attract the provisions of FCA, and handed them to the Revenue Department for afforestation and grazing purposes. This 1987 Government Order was challenged by the Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG) before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court. While this plea was pending, the Centre in February 1992 changed and relaxed its earlier position. It clarified that Zudpi Jungle would continue to be treated as 'forest lands' under the FCA; however, for the part of Zudpi lands that were used for non-forest purposes, the state government shall make a proposal to the Centre seeking its approval under the FCA. Taking a cue from the Centre's decision, the Maharashtra government in 1994 withdrew its 1987 order. With these changing positions, ambiguity prevailed until the Supreme Court's December 12, 1996 judgment in the 'TN Godavarman Thirumulpad' case, which stated that Zudpi lands would also be treated as 'forest lands' under the FCA. In 1998, a High-Powered Committee appointed by the state government recommended that 92,115 hectares should be declared protected forests and 86,409 hectares that were unfit for forest use should be de-notified. Eight years ago, the state government again pushed to denotify Zudpi jungle lands. In 2019, the Maharashtra government, through the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur, filed an interim application and sought the SC's approval to exclude the latter category of land from the purview of FCA. The SC formed a Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which filed its first report after site visits. Since some issues were yet to be resolved, the SC last year sought another report from the CEC. This report formed the basis of the SC's May 22, 2025 verdict. GOVERNMENT: The Maharashtra government argued that Zudpi lands were never forest lands, and due to the reorganisation of states and the inaction of certain officials, the revenue records were never corrected. As such, these lands continued to be erroneously described as Zudpi lands in revenue records. The state argued that denying it relief would lead to 'grave and irreparable damage' to lakhs of citizens, and would stall several projects. INTERVENER: Environmentalist Prasad Khale, intervener in the case, however, argued that de-notifying these lands would degrade healthy forests and disrupt wildlife corridors. He submitted that the 2025 CEC report had ignored ecological concerns, including those of wildlife corridors and the protection of scrub forests, which should not be used for non-forest activities. SC directives strike a balance The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai and Justice Augustine Masih said that it could arrive at a solution to 'balance the rights of the citizens at large on one hand and the interest of the environment on the other hand' due to the efforts made by the CEC. The SC recognised that a large number of Zudpi lands in Nagpur city alone had public utilities such as the High Court building, defence buildings, state secretariat, graveyards, etc. It said citizens residing on these lands for years, or farmers could not be deprived of their residence or livelihood. Therefore, the Supreme Court held that Zudpi jungle lands would be treated as forests, but made exceptions for lands allotted for non-forest use before December 12, 1996. For such lands, where classification (purpose) hadn't changed, the state would be required to obtain the Centre's approval under Section 2 of the FCA for their deletion from the list of forest areas. The court said the Centre shall consider proposals without imposing compensatory afforestation conditions, and should not seek deposition of Net Present Value (NPV) levies. The court directed the Centre and the state to consult and finalise a proposal format within three months with prior approval of the CEC. For post-December 12, 1996 allotments of Zudpi lands, the Centre shall process proposals only after ascertaining reasons and ensuring action against the officers who took allotment decisions in violation of the SC's directions. Special Task Forces in each district will remove encroachments made after October 25, 1980, within two years. All commercial allotments post-October 25, 1989, are to be treated as encroachments. The court clarified no land may be diverted to non-government entities after scrutiny. The Revenue Department must transfer remaining Zudpi lands to the Forest Department within a year, which are to be used for compensatory afforestation. Other Zudpi lands will not be allowed for compensatory afforestation unless certified by the Chief Secretary. Benefitting the state's development plans The verdict has in some ways paved the way for infrastructure and other development works that the state government plans to undertake on certain tracts of lands, after obtaining approval from the central government. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis welcomed the ruling, calling it a boost to Vidarbha's stalled development. The CEC will monitor the transfer of forest land, as directed by the SC. States and Union Territories have been directed to reclaim possession of such lands from occupiers and hand them over to the Forest Department. The SC had said that if reclaiming possession is not in the public interest, the state/UTs shall recover land costs from occupiers and use them to develop forests.
