Srinagar, Dec 01: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has expressed its displeasure and anguish over the failure of government’s non-compliance of its previous directions, regarding the preservation of Dal lake. The court observed that such an approach shows “non-seriousness” on their part.
“Having regard to the conduct of the respondents, which, prima facie, shows non-seriousness on their part, there is hardly any justification for extending the time for complying with previous directions of this Court,” a division bench of Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Sanjay Dhar said while hearing a PIL pertaining to the preservation and conservation of Dal Lake.
“However, in the interests of justice and in order to enable the Court to effectively determine the issues highlighted in previous orders, two week’s further time is granted to the respondents to comply with the previous directions of this Court,” the court added.
Failing which, the bench directed, Vice Chairman, J&K Lakes Conservation and Management Authority (LCMA) and Chief Town Planner, Kashmir, to remain personally present before the court on December, 13, this year.
The court passed the directions after observing that the report relating to compliance of orders passed on September, 08, 2022 and November 09, 2022 has not been filed by the respondents.
The bench noted that an application filed by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Housing and Urban Development (H&UD) Department stating that a detailed examination of the issues for filing of compliance affidavit was undertaken including consultation with other departments and stakeholders.
The court noted that the contents of the application, which sought extension of time for filing compliance, reveal that though the directions were initially passed on September, 08, 2022, yet “no sense of urgency” towards addressing the issues highlighted by the court has been shown by the respondents, “at least this is what is discernible from the contents of the application filed on behalf of the Principal Secretary H&UD, Department.”
The bench observed that as to what the respondents were doing from September, 8, 2022, to November, 18, 2022, when the meeting is stated to have taken place, is not indicated in the application.
“Prima facie, it appears to us that it is only when the date of hearing in the Court was approaching, the respondents felt the necessity of holding the meeting and initiating the steps for compliance of the Court orders,” the bench underscored.
The court recorded that had the respondents initiated these steps immediately after passing of the order dated September, 08, 2022, by now the exercise would have been completed and the compliance report would have been before us.
On September, 08, the court, while taking note of Chapter-VIII of the Master Plan 2035, which relates to the issues concerning the lakes, had observed that to balance the needs for sustainable development and economic prosperity of the area, certain clarifications and guidelines are necessary to ensure that the provisions of the Master Plan are not abused.
Accordingly, a number of guidelines were issued by the court and it was observed that the Master Plan is open for revision and modification as per the advice of the experts i,e. the Town Planners, Environmentalists and other stakeholders including the authorities responsible for the Smart City Project.
The bench had further observed that the Advocate General may take appropriate steps to get the area of the buffer zones around Dal Lake re-examined by the State authorities and to place the same on record within six weeks after providing a copy of the same to the Amicus Curiae who was directed to file his objections and suggestions thereto.
On November, 09, 2022, when the matter was again taken up, the bench had observed that even after a lapse of two months, no steps had been taken by the respondents pursuant to the previous order passed in September, 8 and nothing was placed on record before the court.
Accordingly, the court directed the Vice Chairman(VC), LCMA to file a response on affidavit by November 16, as to what has happened during the last two months. On the said date, VC, LCMA was asked to remain present in the court.
On November 16, a request was made by the Advocate General, DC Raina for extension of time in complying with the previous directions of the Court.
Raina had submitted that the respondents are in the process of implementing the orders and that they shall be submitting a response so as to enable the Court to decide the applications and writ petitions seeking directions for grant of permission for constructions in terms of the Master Plan 2035.
In this regard, the court had directed the Principal Secretary, H&UD to file an affidavit in compliance with the directions passed by it regarding re-examining the area of the buffer zones around Dal Lake and building permission in tune with the new Master Plan 2035.
The VC, LCMA was also directed to file the responses to the applications and writ petitions seeking direction for grant of permission for construction in accordance with the new Master Plan 2035 and the applicable law.
The court was hearing a PIL on preservation and conservation of Dal lake which was initiated in 2002 on the basis of a letter from a law student, Syed Iqbal Tahir Geelani.
The letter highlighted the miserable condition 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.Lake
