Pollution board cancels clearance to resort on Chandigarh periphery

The Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB) has withdrawn the “consent to operate” granted to a Nayagaon farmhouse, located on the periphery of Chandigarh, for engaging in commercial activity on land delisted from the forest area.

The PPCB made the submission during a hearing of a case by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) following an application moved by Rana Iqbal Singh Golly against the open-air banquet.

The PPCB had granted the consent to Hermitage Farmhouse under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

The NGT has asked a joint committee, comprising representatives of the Central Pollution Control Board, Punjab State Pollution Control Board and the District Magistrate, Mohali, to look into the matter and submit a report.

During the hearing, the Punjab Forest Department had stated that under the conditions for the area removed from the purview of Sections 4 and 5 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA), 1900, the state government had to ensure that no commercial activity was permitted there.

For its part, the Department of Town and Country Planning had said that the construction of a farmhouse was allowed only for residential use on a minimum holding of 2.5 acres of agricultural land. It could not be used for commercial activity, it had said.

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests RK Mishra confirmed that commercial activity was not allowed on land removed from the provisions of the PLPA. “It can only be used for bona fide agriculture purposes and for sustaining livelihood of the landowner,” he said.

Over the years, a number of farmhouses and palatial structures have come up along the forest area of eco-fragile Shivalik hills and some are being used for commercial activities such as marriage functions and social gatherings.

The Forest Department had written to the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) to curb the mushrooming of farmhouses and plotting, being done by developers in violation of the Supreme Court guidelines, in delisted forest areas.

While delisting the land, the SC had directed the state to ensure that no commercial activity be allowed and such land be used for bona fide agriculture use. Since the responsibility of regulating the areas delisted from the PLPA came under the Housing and Local Government departments, the Forest Department had written to the two departments to curb such violations.