![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Saturday, June 16, 2001 |
| Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Features | Classifieds | Employment | Index | Home | |
|
| |
Southern
States | Previous
| Next
No more structures near Hussainsagar: HC
By Our Legal Correspondent
HYDERABAD, JUNE 15. A Division Bench of the A.P. High Court, comprising
Chief Justice Mr. Satyabrata Sinha and Mr. Justice S.R. Nayak, on Friday
declared that there shall be no further construction of permanent
structures on and near the Hussainsagar lake and its catchment area.
The Bench made it clear that any other activity would have to be taken
up only after a clearance from the A.P. Pollution Control Board. The Bench
was disposing of a writ petition filed by `Hyderabad Bachao' and `Samata',
voluntary organisations, represented by Capt. J. Rama Rao and Mr. Ravi
Rebbapragada respectively. The petitioners filed the writ petition
complaining that the Tourism Department was going ahead with about 18
projects in and around the already endangered lake.
The multi-storeyed structures and shopping plazas in the name of
recreation would only spell doom for ecology, they complained and feared
that due to reduction of water spread area the danger of flashfloods was
looming large. The petitioners said due to the actions of the Government
the lake water area had been reduced by 300 aces in the last 25 years.
They contended that the very creation of Buddha Purnima Project Authority
was in violation of 74th constitutional amendment Article 243-ZE which
deals with urban planning. They also alleged that the Government was
violating the zonal regulations of the Hyderabad Urban Development
Authority.
The Government, in its defence, said the development around
Hussainsagar was pursuant to various reports, including that of the
internationally renowned consultants, Chales Correa. It also said
recreational activity could not be termed a `commercial venture' and
charged the petitioners with complaining about non- existing issues. It
further said the petitioners have not proved that there was pollution in
the lake.
The Bench, however, noted it was well established that the lake was
already polluted. Relying upon various Supreme Court judgments, especially
the latest one regarding the Osmansagar lake (wherein an oil extracting
mill was directed to be removed from the catchment area), the Bench
declared that the burden of proof to establish that there was no pollution
is upon the polluter or the one who wanted to change the status quo.
The Bench stressed the need for preserving the lakes to prevent
ecological disaster. Referring to the contention of the Government that a
part of the water body had been renotified as a `recreational zone,' it
expressed dissatisfaction in the manner it was done. The Bench concluded
by making it clear that no further permanent structures should come up
near the lake.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail |
|
Section : Southern States Previous : Godavari rising, flood alert sounded Next : Report on farm practices for medicinal plants soon | |
| Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Features | Classifieds | Employment | Index | Home | |
|
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu | |