Bombay High Court allows some interim relief in PIL to save public amenity spaces
The Bombay High Court on 1st Feb 2022 issued directions to the Pune MunicipalCorporation in a PIL filed by Citizens for Area Sabha and Pashan Area Sabha, two citizens groups from Pune, who had filed a PIL against the Maharashtra State Govt alleging that the UDCPR regulation no 3.5.1 “Provision for Amenity space” arbitrarily and illegally reducesthe extent of mandatory reservations of public amenity spaces in layouts.The earlier provision in PMC DCPR 2017 provides 15% amenity space reservation on 4000sq mtrs layout and above, however the UDCPR sanctioned in December 2020 and its subsequent amendments in June 2021 now state that for a layout of 20,000 sq mtrs andabove,only 5% of the area will be designated as public amenity space.”
[ad id=’13893′]
The bench led by Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice V. G. Bisht opined in the order – “However, we are of the considered 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 petitioners in the PIL had pleaded that such dilution in amenity space requirements will turn towns and cities of Maharashtra into concrete jungles and it will deprive citizens 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 Live ability index and Environment in the towns and cities of Maharashtra.
Multiple objections against the dilution of amenity space regulations were raised by citizens who also attended public hearings, pleading with the state govt to revoke the diluted clause. However the State Govt ignored the citizen’s demands thereby compelling citizens to approach HC.
Advocate Ronita Bhattacharya representing the petitioners remarked -Urban local bodies need amenity spaces to fulfil their constitutional responsibility as per the 74th Constitutional amendment to provide for essential civic necessities, services and public amenities. The PIL has challenged the UDCPR and the clause 3.5.1 as void, inoperative and ultra vires Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India as well as contrary to the provisions of Articles 243W, 243ZD and 243ZE of the Constitution, read with its 12th Schedule.
[ad id=’12390′]
The HC has in its order allowed reply-affidavits to be filed by the respondents by three weeks; rejoinder thereto, if any, may be filed by one week thereafter. The PIL petition is listed for 7 March, 2022 for further consideration.
