By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Oct 19: The High Court of Meghalaya on Thursday directed the state government to ensure that the aesthetics around a waterbody and the natural beauty are not compromised in the name of development or only for the purpose of allowing private construction to come up.
The court made the observation during the hearing of a PIL pertaining to the cleanliness of Umiam Lake, regarding which the state referred to an August 25 notification.
The state referred to the definition of “regulated zone” in paragraph 2(1)(c) of the Meghalaya Waterbodies (Preservation and Conservation) Guidelines, 2023. The definition indicates that the construction of buildings and other structures in the regulated zone would be according to paragraph 5 of the guidelines.
However, paragraph 5 of the guidelines has nothing to do with the regulated zone. The court said there is a reference to the regulated zone only in paragraph 7 of the guidelines.
“It is evident that the guidelines have been hurriedly prepared and the mistake may also indicate that there may not have been full application of mind,” the court said.
On behalf of one of the respondents, it was submitted that there are other bylaws in place and there is no clarity as to whether these guidelines or the existing bylaws would prevail over one or the other.
It was also submitted on behalf of the same respondent that even though the methodology for ascertaining FAR has been indicated, no regulations about the parking places have been indicated.
The relevant respondent said that parking is a big problem in the entire state and new construction should not be permitted without parking space allotted and used for only such purposes.
A further point raised by the respondent was that the vista should be clear, in the sense that constructions permitted under the guidelines should not impede the view from the adjoining roads of the waterbodies or the natural beauty beyond. The respondent claimed that in its previous letters, including one on October 9, such aspects had been brought to the state’s notice, which did not choose to heed them.
“Since the relevant guidelines appear to contain obvious mistakes which need to be corrected, the matter will stand over for four weeks for the notification to be corrected, modified, revisited and republished,” the court of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice B. Bhattacharjee said.
It said that these concerns must be addressed both to ensure that the aesthetics around a water body and the natural beauty are not compromised in the name of development or only for the purpose of allowing private construction to come up.
The court added that the subsisting injunction would continue to be in place till such time the guidelines are finalised and accepted by the court.