"Petition premature, bereft of specifics:" Kerala High Court dismisses plea against Draft regulations in Lakshadweep

The Kerala High Court on Thursday dismissed a petition that sought directives from the court to Lakshadweep Administration to not implement the Draft Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation (LDAR), the Lakshadweep Animal Preservation Regulations (LAPR), and the Lakshadweep Panchayat Regulations, Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act (Goondas Act)..In May 2021, the petitioner, KP Noushad Ali, Secretary of Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee, had moved the Kerala High Court challenging various measures introduced by the administration alleging that the ulterior motive of such steps is to destroy the traditional life and culture of the island (KP Noushad Ali Vs. Union Territory of Lakshadweep).He submitted that until further objections are called for from Lakshadweep residents, the draft Rules should not be implemented. .[Lakshadweep] Will destroy traditional life, culture: Plea in Kerala High Court against Draft LDAR, "backdoor" beef ban, Panchayat regulations.The Court had earlier declined to stay the proposed regulations, including the "backdoor beef ban", stating that these are policy matters. It had nevertheless sought response from the government. .During the hearing on Thursday, advocate Anoop V Nair, appearing for the petitioner, also challenged the new COVID standard operating procedure (SOP) adopted by the administration wherein restrictions on entry into the Islands were relaxed. He alleged that the test positivity rate shot up after the SOP was changed. Nearly 600 objections have been filed by residents regarding this and the other proposed regulations, he added..Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Central government, brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner is not even a resident of Lakshadweep. He alleged that the petition is a misuse of public interest litigation. He also reiterated that the laws highlighted by the petitioner are only drafts and haven't been approved for implementation. The objections raised by residents have been collected will be handed over to the President before he considers the draft regulations, it was submitted..A Division Bench of Justices SV Bhatti and Murali Purushothaman noted that it is for the administration to make rules regarding SOP and that the regulations challenged by the petitioner are drafts that have not yet received the seal of approval by the relevant authorities. .Justice Bhatti also remarked that the challenge against LDAR presupposes a particular state of affairs in the name of development. If the draft regulations are enacted, any aggrieved parties may approach the court, he added..The Bench observed that the fact that petitioner hails from Malappuram and only visits Lakshadweep for social work itself put the petition on a weak standing. The Court, therefore, asked the petitioner if they should impose costs for the omnibus petition which "virtually seeks to administer the area through PILs". .The Bench noted that the petition seems premature and bereft of any specific details that can be contended at this stage and proceeded to dismiss it.