Pallikaranai Ramsar site land dispute: Madras High Court dismisses two PILs

The Madras High Court on Tuesday dismissed two public interest litigation petitions filed against construction of high rise residential towers by Brigade Enterprises Limited on a land reportedly falling within the prohibited zone of Pallikaranai marsh, a designated Ramsar wetland site.

First Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan refused to entertain the PIL petitions filed by AIADMK legal wing office-bearer J. Brezhnev and anti corruption organisation Arappor Iyakkam since the Supreme Court was already seized of a similar case.

They also recorded the submission of Advocate General P.S. Raman representing the State government and senior counsel P. Wilson, representing the Tamil Nadu Wetlands Authority, that the process of demarcating the Ramsar boundaries for the Pallikaranai marsh was yet to be completed.

The Bench took note that the Supreme Court had taken up the issue of fixing the boundaries of Ramsar sites and had called upon all State governments to submit the steps taken by them. The Tamil Nadu government had completed the ground truthing exercise but was yet to complete a few more procedures.

It was only after the completion of the entire exercise, it would be known whether the lands in which the high rise towers had been planned would fall within the prohibited zone or outside the zone, the A-G told the court and said, as on date, the property was a ‘patta’ (private) land.

On their part, senior counsel C. Manishankar and Srinath Sridevan, representing Brigade Enterprises, told the court the patta (revenue record for private land ownership) for the land had been issued way back in 1935 and there was no way the property could be construed as a part of the Ramsar site.

They told the Division Bench even the State government had issued a press release in October 2025 denying certain news reports and clearly stating the lands in question were patta properties. It was only after a thorough check, the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority had granted building plan approval.

The senior counsel added the High Court need not conduct parallel proceedings when the Supreme Court was seized of the issue and had directed the Tamil Nadu government to submit the ground truthing reports and other materials related to demarcation of Ramsar site boundaries.