Punjab and Haryana High Court issues notice to Haryana over lifting of stilt+4 construction embargo

The Punjab and Haryana High Court today put the state of Haryana on notice on a petition filed in public interest challenging, among other things, the “arbitrary, unplanned, and unsustainable” decision to revoke a self-imposed embargo on stilt+4 constrictions.

The notice by the bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal for October 23 came on a petition filed against the state and another respondent by Sunil Singh through senior counsel Meet Malhotra and Shehbaz Thind.

The bench, during the course of hearing, was told that a state-appointed committee had in August last year mandated that an audit of infrastructure and environmental impact assessment be completed within a year. The committee further recommended “only after examining the audit report could any decision be made regarding the lifting of the embargo on stilt+4 constructions, including stilt parking and a total building height of 15 metres”. An assurance to this effect was given by the Chief Minister on the floor of the Haryana assembly on February 22, 2023, upon the insistence of the Speaker.

Going into the background of the matter, the counsel submitted that the Haryana government had placed a ban on new stilt+4 approvals on March 23, 2023, following widespread concerns from resident welfare associations and citizens regarding the inability of Gurugram’s infrastructure to cope with the increased population and traffic that would result from such constructions.

Acknowledging the gravity of the concerns, the respondents constituted an expert committee on March 16, 2023, chaired by Haryana State Pollution Control Board, to study the situation and make appropriate recommendations.

The expert committee engaged with various stakeholders and examined over 26,000 responses from the public, including online and offline submissions. The committee found that Gurugram’s existing infrastructure, including water supply systems, sewerage network and power supply, was woefully inadequate to support additional load that would result from permitting stilt+4 constructions in the existing residential areas.

The expert committee’s report highlighted significant shortcomings in Gurugram’s water infrastructure. While the city’s installed water capacity supply was 570 MLD, the actual demand exceeded 875 MLD. The shortage forced the residents to rely on groundwater, which was depleting at an alarming rate.

In fact, Central Ground Water Board classified over 60% groundwater blocks in Gurugram as overexploited, the bench was told.

It was added that the city’s sewage infrastructure was unable to handle the additional waste generated by increased population density. Gurugram’s existing sewage treatment capacity was 388 MLD, while the actual waste generated exceeds the limit, leading to frequent blockages and backflow into residential areas. The committee found that the existing sewer lines were designed for low-density residential use, and their capacity would be severely overstretched by the higher density permitted under the stilt+4 policy.

In light of these challenges, the expert committee made a series of clear recommendations. It stated that no further approval for stilt+4 constructions should be granted unless a detailed infrastructure capacity audit was conducted to assess the current availability of essential services.

Despite the recommendations, the respondents issued the impugned notification dated July 2 allowing the resumption of stilt+4 constructions without conducting the necessary infrastructure audit or upgrading the cities civics services. “This decision has been taken in complete disregard of the findings of the expert committee and without addressing the legitimate concerns raised by the residence of Gurugram.”

It was further added thousands of building had been constructed ever since stilt+4 policy came into effect, many of which went far beyond their approval layout plans. These buildings often obtained occupancy certificate through corrupt practices with substantial bribes being paid to officials. As a result, 95% of these buildings were found to be illegal, violating key planning and construction norms.