Landslide fear grips Pullampara
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Residents of Pullampara panchayat in Venjaramoodu are increasingly anxious as the monsoon gains strength, with the Neenu Crusher Industry quarry still operational despite its permit expiring on Monday. Locals allege that panchayat secretary P Sunilkumar extended the quarry's permit for another year without the governing committee's approval.
Approximately 50 houses in the area sit on a vulnerable slope, and cracks have already developed in at least 15 of them. Last year, a late-night landslip originating from behind the quarry destroyed two homes. Fortunately, seven people, including four children, were rescued just in time.
Panchayat president P V Rajesh criticised the actions of Sunilkumar, claiming the decision lacked transparency and bypassed democratic processes. 'While he has the authority to issue a licence, he should have consulted the governing committee, given the genuine concerns of the community. We have collectively decided to take legal action,' Rajesh said. Sunilkumar, who is retiring from service on May 31, has reportedly gone on leave since the controversy arose.
Residents have lodged complaints with both the chief minister's and the industries minister's offices. According to an interim Kerala High Court order, the quarry's permit was valid only until May 26, 2025. Locals accuse the quarry management of relying on a 2018 Environmental Clearance that contained false claims about the distance between the quarry and their homes to gain approval for an extension.
Residents from Pullampara, Mamoodu, and Mukkodil report that the blasts from the quarry shake their homes, causing significant damage. Many are living in cracked houses, dreading the upcoming rains.
In March 2025, State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) rejected the quarry's application, citing illegal operations and outstanding fines. The Department of Geology confirmed the presence of cracks in several homes but indicated that a vibration test was necessary to determine if blasting caused the damage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
6 days ago
- New Indian Express
2010 Mangaluru plane crash victims' kin continue battle for compensation
KOZHIKODE: Fifteen years after the tragic Mangaluru air disaster, families of the victims continue to wage an uphill legal battle demanding rightful compensation as mandated under the Montreal Convention. Despite initial assurances of Rs 75 lakh per deceased passenger, many kin allege they have received only a fraction of the legally entitled amount, forcing them to seek justice through the judiciary. The 2010 crash of Air India Express Flight IX-812, a Boeing 737-800 arriving from Dubai, remains one of India's deadliest air disasters. The aircraft overshot the table-top runway at Mangaluru International Airport and plunged into a gorge, killing 158 of the 166 passengers and crew on board. Krishnan, one of the bereaved family members and a petitioner in a case before the Kerala High Court, expressed anguish over the meagre payouts. 'We lost everything that day including our loved ones, our savings, and our future. Yet the compensation offered is a mere token. It's an insult to our loss,' he said. Alongside him, Mayankutty and dozens of others have also filed legal petitions contesting the compensation process. According to Narayanan Killingom, president of Mangaluru Air Crash Victims' Families Association, the airline has yet to disburse the full statutory or 'no-fault' liability amount under the Montreal Convention. 'My brother Gangadharan worked as a truck driver in Dubai. His death devastated our family. We were promised `75 lakh, but later negotiations reduced that. For the families of the deceased, these negotiations should never have applied,' Narayanan said. He confirmed that 42 families remain in legal pursuit of the balance compensation. Compensation discrepancies and legal loopholes Under the Montreal Convention of 1999 ratified by India and incorporated into Indian law via the Carriage by Air (Amendment) Act, 2009, victims' next of kin are automatically entitled to up to 100,000 Special Drawing Rights, an international currency basket defined by the IMF, amounting to roughly Rs 1.52 crore at present exchange rates. This automatic entitlement is classified as 'strict liability,' requiring no proof of fault on the airline's part. Beyond this limit, families can claim additional damages if they can demonstrate negligence or fault by the carrier. However, the onus of disproving fault lies with the airline. In many cases, the airlines have resisted higher payouts by settling quickly and quietly with economically weaker families, offering them reduced compensation in exchange for signing waivers.
Time of India
05-06-2025
- Time of India
State has target to raise green cover by 17% by 2028: Minister
Patna: On World Environment Day, Sunil Kumar, minister for environment, forest and climate change, launched the song 'Harit Bihar banayenge-naya Bihar banayenge' at the Patna zoo on Thursday. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now He also provided assistance of Rs 25,000 to Rajesh Kumar, known as 'Oxygen Man', for his contribution towards environmental conservation. During the event, the minister highlighted the state's progress in increasing its forest cover from 7.62% in 2004 to 15.05% at present, with a target to reach 17% by 2028. He said efforts made by the govt for the promotion of eco-tourism in the state, such as the development of sites like Rajgir, Valmiki Nagar, and Bodh Gaya, are yielding results. "Bihar is not only a land of historical heritage but also environmentally rich. Animal parks like Patna zoo serve as major centres of awareness," he said, adding that initiatives like the Hariyali Mission, Jal-Jeevan-Hariyali and 'Ek ghanta paryavaran ke naam' have engaged all sections of society. He recalled the PM's 'Ek ped maa ke naam' initiative and appealed to people to participate in the environment's protection by planting saplings in the name of their kin. On this occasion, the department's additional chief secretary, Harjot Kaur Bamhrah, stated that environment's protection is possible not only through govt's efforts but also through people's cooperation.
News18
04-06-2025
- News18
Widow Can't Be Thrown Out Of Matrimonial Home By In-Laws: Kerala High Court
Last Updated: A 41-year-old woman approached the courts seeking protection from harassment and forceful eviction from the shared household after her husband's demise in 2009 The Kerala High Court recently upheld a widow's right to reside in her matrimonial home, rejecting objections raised by her in-laws, who had attempted to evict her. The bench of Justice MB Snehalatha dismissed a revision petition filed by the relatives of the deceased husband of a 41-year-old woman who had approached the courts seeking protection from harassment and forceful eviction from the shared household after her husband's demise in 2009. The high court affirmed the decision of the sessions court in Palakkad, which had granted protection and residence orders in the woman's favour after overturning the findings of the judicial magistrate, who had initially dismissed her plea. The woman alleged that following her husband's death, her in-laws began to harass her and obstruct her and her children's entry into the family home. She approached the court under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. However, the magistrate's court held that she had no existing 'domestic relationship" with her in-laws and therefore wasn't entitled to relief under the Act. The sessions court took a different view and granted her the relief sought. The in-laws challenged this before the high court, arguing that the woman owned separate property and had been living at her parental home, thus disqualifying her as an 'aggrieved person" under the Act. Rejecting these arguments, the high court noted that the woman, being the wife of the deceased and having resided in the shared household, fell squarely within the definitions under Sections 2(a), 2(f), and 2(s) of the DV Act. The court reiterated that the right to reside in the shared household does not depend on ownership or continuous residence at the time of the dispute. Quoting extensively from the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in Prabha Tyagi vs Kamlesh Devi, the judgment emphasised that women's right to shelter and security within a domestic setting is fundamental and cannot be undermined merely because they possess alternate accommodation or temporarily reside elsewhere. 'This right is crucial for a woman's safety and dignity, ensuring that she is not forcibly removed or homeless due to domestic abuse," the court observed, while also stressing that the DV Act should be interpreted liberally in favour of victims, keeping its beneficial and protective purpose in mind. Finding no merit in the arguments of the in-laws, the high court refused to interfere with the sessions court order. The revision petition was, accordingly, dismissed. First Published: June 04, 2025, 16:26 IST
