Scope of conditional environmental permission: repair could not justify raising a bund, blocking water flow, or damaging mangroves.

Conditional permission to repair an existing bund did not authorise raising its height, dumping debris and boulders, closing culverts, or destroying mangroves. On the material described, the acts were treated as exceeding the scope of the Collector's order and court directions, with the record showing obstruction of sea-water flow and environmental damage to CRZ-I mangrove areas. The cited challenge to the notification was not considered on merits because it was already pending before the High Court. The stated result was that contempt was made out and restorative directions for removal of the offending constructions and restoration of the bund and culverts were sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants, while claiming to repair the bund, violated the conditional permission and court directions by raising the bund, obstructing the natural flow of water, and damaging mangroves, so as to warrant contempt findings and restorative directions.

Analysis: The conditional permission allowed only repair of the existing bund and expressly prohibited any increase in height, destruction of mangroves, or other construction. The material on record, including inspection reports and the court-appointed inspection, showed large-scale dumping of debris and boulders, widening and raising of the bund, closure of culverts, obstruction of sea-water flow, and destruction of mangroves. Mangroves fell within CRZ-I and were ecologically sensitive, and the attempted justification of repair could not legalise conduct that went beyond the permission granted. The challenge to the notification was not examined on merits because it was already pending before the High Court.

Conclusion: The appellants committed willful disobedience of the Collector's order and the Court's directions. The contempt petitions against them were justified, and the restorative directions for removal of the offending constructions and restoration of the bund and culverts were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A party cannot, under the guise of repairing an authorised structure, exceed the scope of the permission and later resist contempt consequences where the record shows deliberate alteration causing environmental damage and breach of binding judicial and administrative directions.

---