AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Athirapally Resorts Association along with Athirapally Destination Promotion Council has filed this Writ Petition alleging that Athirapally Water
Falls which is one of the main tourist destinations in the State is not opened so far though the Government of India as well as the State Government
have ordered opening of various tourists destinations. It is stated that Ext.P1 order was issued by the Government on 10.10.2020 allowing domestic
tourist visit to Kerala subject to the guidelines of the Ministry of Home Affairs, subject to Covid protocol providing for guidelines to be observed. The
order itself was issued stating that as the people dependent on tourism, for their livelihood are finding it difficult to make ends meet and their livelihood
is affected, it is very essential to reopen tourism in Kerala and allow tourists to visit Kerala. It was also stated therein that tourism does not come
under the prohibited category in the orders issued by the Government of India on 4.6.2020 or on 29.8.2020 by the Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare and Ministry of Home Affairs respectively. By Ext.P2 order issued on the very same day the Government ordered specific protocols, check
measures and access control measures to be maintained in tourism destinations. By this order the Government was pleased to open the tourism
destinations in 2 places as per the guidelines issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department. In phase I the destinations having controlled
access, house boats (including other personalised boating) and adventure tourism activities can be opened w.e.f date of that order 10.10.2020 with
strict SOPs wherein the destinations are not crowded. It was decided to open the destinations which have no controlled access such as beach
destinations from 1.11.2020 onwards. In the annexure to Ext.P2 order general guidelines for the precautionary steps prior to the opening of tourist
destinations were given. The destinations which are having controlled access are given in para.B. A list of tourist destinations is given along with
Ext.P2. The petitioners stated that they have approached the Chief Minister, the Minister for Tourism as well as the District Collector, submitting
various representations requesting to open the Athirapally Water Falls pointing out that thousands of people depending upon the tourism are without
any employment for the last 6 months and similar is the case with those who are running resorts, hotels etc. in Athirapally.
The 5th respondent has filed a statement raising various objections against the maintainability of the Writ Petition at the instance of the petitioners.
It is stated that Athirapally and Vazhachal including the water falls are part of reserve forest. The eco tourism destinations are situated within the
reserve forest which are managed by Kerala Forest Department through Vanasamrakshana samithies (VSS) which are associations of local forest
dependent communities. It is stated that the income from the destination is used for management of sites, visitor amenities, wages and for the well
being of the dependent and the executive committee of VSS is controlling the day to day affairs. During and after the lock down, minimum number of
VSS members are engaged on rotation basis for cleaning and management of ecotourism destinations. According to the respondents, the executive
committee of the Vazhachal VSS and Athirapplly VSS held on 16.8.2020 unanimously opposed the reopening of the eco tourism centres as per
Exts.R5(a) and R5(b). It is stated that the Vazhachal eco tourism destination is managed by Vazhachal tribal VSS, of which all the members are from
Kadar tribe which is one among the particularly vulnerable tribal groups (PVTG) of Kerala. The Kadar are endemic tribes living in the Anamala part
of western ghats and major part live in the jurisdiction of Vazhachal forest division. It is stated that if the Kadar tribes, who are physically weak, are
exposed to pandemic it will cause unpredictable impact and the forest department is now providing alternate employment options within the reserve
forest limits. According to the respondents, Exts.P1 and P2 G.Os issued by the tourism department for the opening of tourism destinations are not
applicable to Athirapally and Vazhachal which are within the limit of reserve forest. It is pointed out that Athirappally and Vazhachal are not included
in the list annexed to G.O Ext.P2. It is also stated that the issue of reopening of eco tourism destination was discussed with the MLA, Chalakkudy,
District Collector, Trichur, Medical Officer, Public Health Centre Vettilappara and Grama Panchayat authorities on 14.10.2020 when all of them
opined that the date of reopening can be decided later in view of the fact that the Covid cases are on rise. Furnishing the statistics relating to the
active cases of Covid 19 in the districts Trichur and Ernakulam from where the people visit Athirapally and Vazhachal it is stated that there is a rise in
the rate of positive cases. The respondent has also stated that the Forest Department has not interfered with the activities of resorts or home stay in
and around Athirappally and they are free to work in accordance with Covid 19 protocol.
Though the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that several of the tourism destinations are opened and there is no purpose in
keeping it closed, when there is no escape from Covid 19, it is seen that Exts.P1 and P2 orders which are relied on by the petitioners are issued by the
Tourism Department and the Vazhachal and Athirappally are not included in the list annexed to Ext.P2. When a statement was filed by the 5th
respondent stating that a decision is taken on 14.10.2020 after Exts.R5(a) and (b) decisions of 16.08.2020, not to reopen the destinations in a meeting
convened by the respective authorities concerned it will not be appropriate for this Court to direct that the tourism destinations in a reserve forest
should be kept open, though it is true that there are several people suffering for want of employment on account of Covid 19 pandemic and also there
is a descend in positive cases. It is only appropriate that the competent authority takes a decision on the matter and the Forest Department would be
the appropriate authority to take a decision in the matter. As it is seen that orders are issued step by step and phase to phase, there cannot be any
apprehension that the Government would not take any decision with respect to the issue pointed out by the petitioners in this Writ Petition.
Therefore, the Department of Forests shall, in consultation with all the heads of departments involved, the District Administration as well as all the
stakeholders, take a decision in the matter at the earliest.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.