Court Rulings On Forged Coastal Construction Approvals
Court Rulings on Forged Coastal Construction Approvals
Courts in India—particularly the High Courts, the Supreme Court, and the National Green Tribunal (NGT)—treat forged CRZ approvals and manipulated coastal clearances as extremely serious violations because they involve:
Environmental destruction
Public authority corruption
Violation of statutory regulations (CRZ Rules, Environment Protection Act, Town Planning Acts)
Criminal offences under the IPC such as cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy, and falsification of records
Below are five major case examples, each explained in depth.
1. Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority v. Maradu Municipality (Supreme Court – 2019)
Issue
The Maradu apartment complexes in Kochi were approved based on illegally issued CRZ clearances. Investigations revealed that the municipality granted construction permissions without valid coastal zone classification and contrary to CRZ-III norms. While this case did not involve an individual forging signatures, it involved fraudulent and illegal approvals by public officials, which courts treat similarly to forgery.
Court’s Findings
The Supreme Court found that the municipal authorities deliberately and illegally granted construction permissions in violation of CRZ Rules.
Officials had misrepresented CRZ maps, showing the area as permissible for construction when it was not.
The Court held that such actions amounted to wilful fraud and abuse of power.
Outcome
The Court ordered demolition of all four high-rise complexes.
It directed criminal proceedings against the responsible officials.
It held that no equities arise from permissions obtained through illegal or fraudulent means.
Legal Principle
If an approval is obtained by fraud, suppression, or misrepresentation, it is void ab initio and can never be validated.
2. Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society Scam Cases (Bombay High Court / CBI Court)
Issue
The Adarsh Housing Society in Mumbai is one of India’s biggest coastal regulation scandals.
The CBI chargesheet, upheld in several Bombay High Court proceedings, alleged that:
CRZ clearances were manipulated
Files were tampered
Notings altered
Approvals obtained through forgery, fake letters, and misrepresentation
Court’s Findings
The Court observed that high-ranking officials and politicians abused their positions, created false communications, and misrepresented the coastal zone classification to obtain construction permissions.
Environmental impact assessments were fraudulently bypassed, and fake NOCs were inserted into files.
Outcome
The Bombay High Court allowed the CBI to proceed with prosecution against public servants.
The building was ordered to be sealed, and demolition was considered because approvals were “tainted with fraud.”
Legal Principle
A forged or fraudulently obtained CRZ clearance cannot confer any legal right on the builder or occupants.
3. Goa Foundation v. State of Goa (Supreme Court / Bombay HC-Goa Bench)
Issue
Goa Foundation challenged several coastal constructions based on fake or fraudulently obtained approvals, including projects where:
CRZ maps were altered
Distances from High Tide Line were manipulated
Fake NOCs were produced before planning authorities
Court’s Findings
Courts repeatedly held that:
Several coastal approvals in Goa were issued by officials without authority.
In some cases, developers submitted falsified survey reports showing artificial boundaries to escape CRZ restrictions.
Any such approval amounted to fraud on environmental law.
Outcome
Multiple constructions were ordered to be stopped or demolished.
Officials issuing manipulated permissions were directed to face disciplinary and criminal action.
Expert committees were appointed to verify authenticity of CRZ maps.
Legal Principle
Fraud unravels everything; even delay or investments cannot save a construction based on forged or manipulated CRZ documentation.
**4. Fishermen Action Committee Cases (Tamil Nadu High Court – CRZ violations in Chennai and Ennore)
Issue
Several cases in Tamil Nadu involved large projects (ports, hotels, and real-estate developments) where:
Developers used forged or fake coastal zone classification letters
Environmental clearances were fabricated or retroactively created
Signatures of officials were forged on NOCs
Court’s Findings
The High Court found:
Certain NOCs presented by builders were not traceable in the issuing department’s records, showing strong evidence of forgery.
Measurements indicating whether the land fell within CRZ-I / II / III were deliberately falsified.
Officials colluding with developers committed criminal breach of trust.
Outcome
Construction was ordered to stop immediately.
FIRs for forgery, cheating, and criminal conspiracy were directed against responsible individuals.
The Court emphasized that environmental approvals obtained through forgery have no legal sanctity whatsoever.
*5. NGT (Southern & Western Zones) – Multiple Resort / Hotel Demolition Orders
Illustrative Examples:
Cases involving resorts in Kerala (Varkala, Alappuzha), Karnataka (Murudeshwar), and Maharashtra (Sindhudurg) show recurring findings where:
Developers built using fake Panchayat approvals claiming they had CRZ permission
Forged High Tide Line demarcation letters were submitted
Approvals showed cut-and-paste signatures or fabricated maps
Tribunal’s Findings
The NGT held that:
Any approval obtained through falsification or forgery is non est (non-existent)
Even honest purchasers cannot claim equity because the entire structure is illegal from inception
Outcomes
Numerous resorts were ordered to be demolished.
Developers were directed to pay compensation for environmental restoration.
Criminal proceedings were recommended against officials who issued or “accepted” forged documents.
Legal Principle
Environmental approvals are strict-compliance documents. Forgery not only voids the approval but attracts criminal liability under IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 471.
Legal Principles Across All These Cases
1. Fraud vitiates every official act
Courts repeatedly hold that:
Fraudulent approvals are void ab initio.
They do not require cancellation—they were never valid to begin with.
2. Officials are personally liable
Courts have directed:
Criminal prosecution
Departmental action
Recovery of environmental damages from officials who knowingly issued forged approvals
3. No equity for builders or purchasers
Even innocent flat buyers cannot claim protection when the underlying approval is forged or illegal.
4. Demolition is a valid remedy
Courts adopt a zero-tolerance approach:
Structures built on forged CRZ approvals are routinely demolished, even if completed and occupied.
5. Criminal prosecution is mandatory
Forgery-related coastal violations attract:
IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 471
Prevention of Corruption Act (for public servants)
Environment Protection Act penalties
RELATED Blog
{!! (isset($postDetail['review_mapping']) && count($postDetail['review_mapping']) > 0 ? count($postDetail['review_mapping']) : 0) }} comments