Grandma's Tales

March 22, 2007

The Elliot’s beach saga – 13 The expert speaks again!

Filed under: Consumer caution,Games People Play,Society — Geeta Padmanabhan @ 7:13 pm

Mr. Raghavan writes again, this time in clearly articulated terms. His, of course, is a very legal term of reference. He quotes rules and appeals for their implementation. If we routinely break rules, why have them in the first place? If, at some point, the rules were deemed necessary, what has happened now to throw them to the wind?
Are we admitting that we made wrong rules?
Or are we saying those rules no longer apply in a changed context?
I mean, should Coastal Zone Regulations be cancelled? Are they wrong? Irrelevant?
Here is Mr. Raghavan’s letter.
21 March 2007 Sub: Beautification of the Elliots Beach
Dear Mr. Satyanarayanan,
Thank you for your message of 20 March. You have indeed taken pains to make a comprehensive document.
I generally agree with your views. I have a few more suggestions for your consideration.
1. The Corporation is not doing us a favour by listening to our views. We need to emphasise that as a public body they are to go by the CRZ regulations.
2. Therefore, any construction with the possible except of toilets should be west of the present jogging track.
3. “Beautification” should not be one-shot affair. The Corporation or PWD, whoever claims to own the beach, should take responsibility for long time maintenance of all facilities in proper condition and create viable infrastructure for that purpose.. They should keep the beach clean and safe. Toilets are essential; satisfactory water supply and drainage should be provided and the toilets should be maintained clean.
4. Cleanliness, sanitation, and anti-litter measures must be enforced on all users.
5. The Corporation should persuade the concerned authority to demolish the Governor’s Bungalow.
6. The terms of lease of the commercial venture may be examined and if it is legally possible the Corporation should make them relocate..
7. Other pucca constructions on the northern side falling within the Coastal Zone need to be reviewed by the CMDA or whoever has the authority and removed if they violate regulations.
8. The hawkers need to be licensed and disciplined. Unlicensed hawkers may be evicted.
9. It is important to take everyone into confidence.The fishermen living in the area have a degree of exemption from the CRZ regulations. They have a stake in the upkeep of the area. Perhaps Exnora or other NGO’s can have a dialogue with them and seek their cooperation in whatever we suggest. A dialogue with the hawkers will also be useful (if not already done). The Corporation may also be requested to take such confidence-building measures.
With regards,Yours sincerely,
S. Raghavan

[Deputy Director-General of Meteorology (Retired)

Consultant to Indian Space Research Organisation]
Phone: + 91 44 24522228 Mobile: + 91 94443 86928

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: