Liquor vends, BYOB outlets under NGT lens for greenbelt violations | Gurgaon News


Liquor vends, BYOB outlets under NGT lens for greenbelt violations
NGT said that the authorities failed to disclose complete details about the ownership and jurisdiction of these establishments

Gurgaon: National Green Tribunal (NGT) has expressed grave concerns over 38 commercial establishments having allegedly encroached upon green belts across Faridabad.On Saturday, NGT directed Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB) to ascertain the duration of such violations, besides initiating recovery of environmental compensation (EC) from the erring units. NGT also directed HSPCB to file an action taken report before the next hearing, scheduled for Oct 8.NGT was hearing an application that alleged these establishments — including liquor vends, taverns and BYOB outlets — were operating without obtaining the requisite permissions from the competent authorities.The tribunal questioned authorities how these establishments continued to operate from green belts and even forest land “despite lacking statutory approvals”.Examining affidavits filed by Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP), Municipal Corporation Faridabad (MCF) and the forest department, the tribunal observed that the status of several establishments remained unclear.The authorities failed to disclose complete details about their ownership, jurisdiction or whether they continued to operate from green belts, NGT said.Observing that past violations also required scrutiny, the tribunal directed HSPCB to determine how long the private establishments operated from green belts without the necessary authorisations and permissions and to take appropriate steps for levying environmental compensation.Petitioner Narender Sirohi told TOI, “For years, commercial establishments have continued to operate on land meant to remain as green belts. NGT has rightly directed authorities to examine past violations and recover EC wherever the law has been breached. We hope the directions are implemented in letter and spirit.”According to HSVP’s affidavit, three establishments, which were earlier operating from green belts, have now shifted to vacant HSVP land and are no longer located in green belt areas. However, a liquor vend near Jaat Chowk in Sahupura village continues to function from the green belt as the matter is pending before a Faridabad district court, which has granted a stay order.The tribunal, however, noted that HSVP had not disclosed the status of several other establishments, stating only that they did not fall under its jurisdiction and were located on land belonging to agencies such as Faridabad Metropolitan Development Authority, the irrigation department or on private land.The forest department informed the tribunal that only four of the 38 locations fell within its jurisdiction, including sites in Bhatola, Lakarpur, Mewla Maharajpur and Manger. It said show-cause notices had been issued to all four establishments, but no replies had been received.The department added that demolition and removal action had been initiated against structures on private land and would be completed within four weeks, while the issue had been taken up with the concerned departments in cases involving govt land. It also said it had requested the excise department to review licences issued to these establishments.During the hearing, counsel for the forest department informed the tribunal that respondent No 32 had secured a status quo order from a civil court.The tribunal also sought an explanation, observing that the establishment had submitted a proposal for diversion of forest land, which was still pending. It directed the forest department to clarify how the unit was operating on forest land without obtaining diversion approval under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.MCF submitted that only one area fell within its jurisdiction and that action had been taken against the establishment. However, the tribunal observed that the civic body’s affidavit did not specify the nature of the action, when it was taken, or whether the establishment had actually been removed from the green belt.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *