HC notice to Centre, state on construction ban in Aravalis

CHANDIGARH: Taking cognizance of a petition seeking directions to ban construction in the Aravalis by defining it as forest area, the Punjab and Haryana high court on Thursday issued notice to the Union ministry of environment, forest and climate change and the Haryana government. The Haryana wildlife department has also been asked to file reply on the issue by August 3.
According to the petition, banning the construction activity in the Aravalis was required keeping in view the May 7, 1992, notification issued by the government of India for safeguarding the range. A division bench comprising Justices A K Mittal and T S Dhindsa issued the notice after hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Harinder Dhingra, a Gurgaon-based RTI activist.

Claiming his petition to be about the protection of environment and safeguarding the Aravalis falling under Garatpur Bas, the petitioner has informed that the construction of a slaughter house in Bandhwari and a proposed road known as Greater Southern Peripheral Road passing through the Aravalis, for which thousands of trees would be required to be cut, would lead to environmental degradation in the region.

The HC was informed that through a notification issued on May 7, 1992, under the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the state had restricted certain activities in specified areas in the range, which was causing environmental degradation. The notification prohibits cutting of trees without the Central government's prior permission in the areas recorded as non-cultivable hill, foothill pastures, ravine foothills, cultivable grassy foothills and rocky areas between two hills in the land record maintained by the state government.

"In the above context, it is submitted that the Haryana government has violated the provisions of the Aravalis notification and various judgements of the Supreme Court with respect to protecting it. Opening of more areas in the range for construction do not serve any purpose but is meant to benefit illegal farmhouse owners, Ansals Retreat and DLF under the shield of welfare," argued the petitioner in the high court.

The state as a custodian of natural resources has a duty to maintain them not merely for the benefit of the public, but for the interest of flora and fauna, wildlife and so on, the petition said.