‘Policy of State Is To Commercialise Hills’, Uttarakhand High Court Directs State To Formulate Tourism Development Plan

Observing that the policy of state in practice is only to “commercialise hills”, The Uttarakhand High Court directed the state to formulate the Tourism Development Plan (TDP), and to seek approval of the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change within the next four weeks.

The bench of Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Rakesh Thapliyal said, “ Our experience has shown, and we are pained and dismayed to notice, that the policy of the State, in practice, appears to be only to commercialise the hills, and to generate more and more revenues, by permitting commercial activities. There is very little emphasis on actual preservation and protection of the environment.”

The State appears to be completely insensitized and blind to the enormous environmental degradation that the entire State – and not just the Doon Valley is suffering. No wonder, the State is urging the MoEFCC to repeal the Doon Valley Notification in toto, added the Court.

These observations came in response to the PIL filed by Environment lawyer Akash Vashishtha through advocate Rakshit Joshi against State inaction for preparing the TDP and and Master Plan for the Doon Valley comprising Dehradun, Rishikesh, Mussoorie, Haridwar.

The petition seeks the issuance of directions to the respondents to take immediate steps for preparing a TDP, a Master Plan, and a Land Use Plan for the entire Doon Valley as mandated under the Doon Valley Notification, 1989.

In the previous hearing, the Court had directed the State to file “a better affidavit” bringing on record, all the documents, and the policies claimed to have been formulated from time to time after the issuance of the 1989 Notification by the Ministry of Environment and Forest.

The Court noted that the documents placed on record regarding the policies does not have any statutory force and said the State does not appear to have understood the purpose of issuance of the Doon Valley Notification by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, way back in the year 1989.

“The purpose was, clearly, to preserve the eco-sensitive Doon Valley, and to prevent its degradation, which had been set into motion even then,” added the bench.

Perusing the Uttarakhand Tourism Policy 2030, framed by the State, the Court observed that, “The policy contains lot of jargon, with no meaningful content. The said policy does not exhibit the application of mind by any person with expertise in the field of environment conservation. It does not appear to be worth the paper it is written upon.”

The Court pointed out that the policy talks of things to be done in the future, but the said policy does not state, as to what decisions have already been taken, and what measures have already been put in place, to attain Sustainable Tourism.

In the light of the above the Court directed to formulate the Tourism Development Plan within next four weeks.

The Court further added that Under the Doon Valley Notification, as amended, the approval of the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change is must before starting any mining activity in the Doon Valley

While listing the matter for October 10, the Court said, “We direct the Union of India to file an affidavit, specifically disclosing its position with regard to the implementation of the Doon Valley Notification, as amended on 06.01.2020, and the fate of the request made by the State Government for repeal of the Doon Valley Notification, as amended in 2020.”

The bench also directed Centre to disclose the status with regard to consideration of the Integrated Master Plan submitted by the State in April.

Case Title: Akash Vashishtha v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors.Appearance: Advocate Rakshit Joshi, counsel for the petitioner.Advocates C.S. Rawat, Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, learned Brief Holder for the State- respondent nos.1 to 3.Advocate Lalit Sharma, Standing Counsel for the Union of India- respondent no.4Advocate Aditya Pratap Singh, counsel for respondent no.5.Advocate Vinay Garg and Mr. Rahul Consul, counsels for respondent nos.6 and 7.

Also Read | 'Completely Unacceptable': Uttarakhand High Court Raps State For Failing To Prepare Tourism Development Plan For Doon Valley