HC issues directions to PMC in PIL to save public amenity spaces

The court took cognizance of the concern raised by residents over changes in the Development Control rules by the state government, which reduce the extent of mandatory reservations of public amenity spaces in layouts.

Citizens of Area Sabha and Pashan Area Sabha, two groups in the city, filed a PIL against the state government alleging that the Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations (UDCPR) on provision of amenity spaces is done arbitrarily and illegally as it reduces the extent of mandatory reservations of public amenity spaces in layouts.

The earlier provision of Development Control and Promotion Rules of PMC provided 15 perc ent amenity space reservation on layout area of 4,000 sq metres and above. However, the UDCPR sanctioned in December 2020 and its subsequent amendments in June 2021 state that for a layout of 20,000 sq metre and above area, only five percent of the area will be designated as public amenity space.

Hearing the petitioner on February 1, Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice V G Bisht said, “It is well known that presumption of constitutionality applies both to statute law as well as subordinate legislation. Except for exceptional circumstances, the courts do not lean in favour of staying the operation of any law by an interim order. In such view of the matter, we decline any interim relief as claimed.”

“However, we are of the opinion that interest of justice in this case would be sufficiently served if it is ordered that clause 3.5.1 of the 2020 Regulations would be subject to and abide by the result of this Public Interest Litigation.

It is ordered accordingly. We also direct that while granting future sanctions for projects, the Pune Municipal Corporation shall invariably make an endorsement in the plans being sanctioned that the same would also be subject to the result of this Public Interest Litigation,” the court order stated.

The petitioners had pleaded that such dilution in amenity space requirements will turn cities into concrete jungles and deprive residents of essential amenities due to lack of required amenity spaces. The loss of open spaces, public amenities, facilities and green cover will have a detrimental effect on the liveability index and environment in Maharashtra.

Representing the petitioners, advocate Ronita Bhattacharya said urban local bodies need amenity spaces to fulfill their constitutional responsibility as per the 74th Constitutional amendment to provide essential civic necessities, services and public amenities.

The PIL has challenged the UDCPR and the concerned clause as void, inoperative and ultra vires of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution as well as contrary to the provisions of Articles of the Constitution with its 12th Schedule. The High Court has allowed the respondents to submit affidavits in reply within three weeks.