Telangana High Court Demands Government Clarification on KBR Park Construction Activities
The Telangana High Court, based in Hyderabad, has issued a significant directive to both the state and central governments, seeking detailed explanations regarding ongoing construction work in the vicinity of KBR Park. While the court declined to impose an immediate halt to the construction activities, it emphasized the necessity for a thorough examination to determine whether these operations comply with the permissible limits within an eco-sensitive zone.
Court's Scrutiny and Directions to Governments
A bench led by Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin presided over a series of petitions, including a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) initiated through a letter from the editor of The Times of India in 2016. The court has mandated that both governments formally record their stances and submit additional affidavits if necessary. This move underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring environmental regulations are upheld.
Petitioner's Allegations and Court's Observations
One of the petitioners raised serious concerns, alleging that the construction near KBR Park was conducted in violation of Supreme Court guidelines concerning eco-sensitive buffer zones. The petitioner claimed that no public hearing was held, despite previous directives from the high court. In response, the bench instructed the petitioner to conduct comprehensive research to distinguish between activities that are prohibited, regulated, or permissible within the buffer zone of the eco-sensitive area.
The court specifically sought clarity on whether the ongoing works fall under prohibited categories such as mining or reservoir construction, or regulated activities like road and pavement development. "The petitioner's allegations should also be considered. The photos submitted show pavement works which could be a permissible activity. If such structures are not repaired, it would harm the citizens," the bench remarked, highlighting the balance between environmental protection and public welfare.
Key Issues Raised During Proceedings
- Tree Felling Concerns: The court inquired about any instances of tree felling. P Sree Ramya, counsel for one of the PILs, stated she was unaware of such activities but argued that large-scale construction is underway with substantial funding, urging the court to maintain the status quo.
- State's Defense: Advocate General A Sudarshan Reddy, representing the state, acknowledged the construction but asserted it adheres to high court directions from 2021 in a related case. He requested time to provide a detailed response, countering traffic concerns by noting, "Traffic jams around the park are also an environmental hazard."
- Central Government's Position: Additional Solicitor General of India B Narasimha Sharma sought additional time to obtain and present the Union government's official stance on the matter.
Background and Legal Context
The controversy stems from the eco-sensitive zone notification issued in 2020 for KBR Park, which remains under challenge in ongoing writ petitions. Sree Ramya highlighted that construction on pavements continues unabated, supported by photographic evidence submitted to the court. The bench clarified its focus on essential issues, avoiding decisions based on mere apprehensions, and subsequently adjourned the hearing.
This case underscores the ongoing tension between urban development and environmental conservation in Hyderabad, with the Telangana High Court playing a pivotal role in ensuring legal and regulatory compliance. The outcome could set a precedent for how eco-sensitive zones are managed across the state and potentially influence similar disputes nationwide.
