Srinagar, Nov 10: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Thursday directed the Vice Chairman, J&K Lakes Conservation and Management Authority, (LCMA) to appear in person before it on November, 16 and explain what they have done during the last two months regarding re-examining the area of the buffer zones around Dal Lake.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Puneet Gupta directed the Vice Chairman, LCMA to file a response on an affidavit by the next date of hearing.
The bench also directed the Vice Chairman to file response to all these applications seeking directions for grant of permission for construction in tune with the Master Plan 2035 by November 14, this year, with an advance copy to the other side.
In a previous hearing, the court had asked the Advocate General to take appropriate steps to get the area of buffer zone around the Dal Lake re-examined by the State authorities and place the same on record within six weeks.
The court observed that after two months nothing had been placed on record before it despite clear cut directions.
The government advocate, Ilyas Nazir Laway, when asked by the court, submitted that the Advocate General had convened a meeting with the officers on the subject.
“In order to ascertain as to what has happened during the last two months, it has become necessary to seek response to be filed by Vice Chairman, J&K LCMA on affidavit by the next date, a copy whereof be provided to the learned Amicus in advance,” the bench directed.
The court fixed the matter for hearing on November 16, 2022.
“On the appointed date Vice Chairman, JK LCMA shall remain present,” it directed.
The court was hearing a PIL on preservation and conservation of Dal lake which was initiated in 2002 on the basis of a letter of one, Syed Iqbal Tahir Geelani, a student of 6th Semester LLB University of Kashmir, Srinagar.
The letter highlighted the miserable conditions of the various water bodies and lakes which at one time were the lifeline of the valley. Since 2002, the Court has passed various orders for the cleaning, development and upkeep of the lakes, especially the Dal.
Previously, the court had observed that the Master Plan is open for revision and modification as per the advice of the experts, i.e., Town Planners, Environmentalists and the other stakeholders including the authorities responsible for the Smart City Project.
The court while clarifying and modifying the previous orders recorded that the order would supersede and be in modification of all earlier orders passed by it in the present proceedings.
The court pointed out that the directions passed by it from the date, July, 19, 2002 expressly prohibited new construction work or even carrying of building material in and around 200 meters from the periphery of Water Bodies or Dal lake.
It underscored that the only exception provided was for the purposes of grant of permission for the repairs and renovation of the existing buildings/structures falling within 200 Meters of the Water Bodies/the Dal Lake.
The bench noted that the Master Plan 2035, subject to the outcome of the present proceedings, relaxes the 200 meter limit, by defining Buffer Zones of 20 to 100 meters from the periphery of the concerned water body, depending on the area concerned.
The manner of utilization of lands in the buffer zone is categorized as for the purposes of Parks and Gardens in the Master Plan 2035, it recorded.
The bench further recorded that the efforts made by it and by the various authorities involved in the preservation of Dal Lake cannot be put to naught.
“However, there is still need to ensure the preservation of this crown jewel and the prohibition contained in our order dated July 19, 2002 with respect to constructions within 200 meters of the periphery of Dal Lake shall continue to hold the field that is the buffer zones for Dal Lake in the Master Plan 2035 shall be read to be 200 meters,” the court said.
With respect to other water bodies identified in the Master Plan 2035, the bench, however, modified the order dated July, 19, 2002 and clarified that the prohibition on construction shall stand modified to the extent that the prohibition shall apply in terms of the distances/buffer zones identified by the Master Plan itself.
It pointed out that the land use ascribed to the term “Parks and Gardens” ranges from, play fields and floricultures nurseries, to amusement parks and swimming pools.
The bench while appreciating that the same is aimed at preserving the natural beauty and ecology of the area while opening avenues of sustainable development, said that they feel that many of these uses would required construction of a permanent nature, “but developments and constructions in this ecologically sensitive area may negate any progress made in the past 20 years by the efforts of the authorities concerned and this Court.”
“Given the same, it is clarified that no new permanent
construction shall be allowed in these Buffer Zones,” it directed.
The court directed the authorities to continue to consider grant of permission for the repairs and renovation of the existing permanent buildings or structures falling within such Buffer Zones in accordance with law.
The bench said that the meaning of the term repairs and renovations also need to be examined.
“Many buildings remained in a state of disrepair for long periods. Some have also borne the brunt of the devastating floods in 2014 and other disasters through the last 20 years,” it pointed out.
Clarifying that where plinths have been existing prior to the orders passed by it on July 19, 2002, the court directed that there shall be no barrier on any extent of repair, renovation or even reconstruction of such buildings to ensure that the structures are safe and in compliance with building bye-laws.
The court directed that fresh and new construction of permanent structures apart from the existing plinth would remain prohibited.
The bench further directed that development in the Buffer Zones of the concerned water body except the Dal area may be allowed in accordance with the Master Plan 2035, subject to the condition, that no fresh construction of a permanent nature (apart from repair, renovation or reconstruction of existing plinths as on July 19, 2002) shall be allowed in these areas.
The bench also directed those structures of a temporary nature, such as tents, kiosks, floating jetties, or other such structures that can be erected without harming the surrounding areas may be allowed for utilization of such lands.
This would only be apposite, keeping in mind that 20 years have elapsed since the restrictions were imposed, the bench said.
