National Green Tribunal
Drlubnasarwathdr Lubna Sarwath vs State Of Telangana Rep By Its Chief ... on 10 August, 2023
Author: Satyagopal Korlapati
Bench: Satyagopal Korlapati
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No.72 of 2020(SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Dr. Lubna Sarwath
State General Secretary
Socialist Party (India)
Ex-convenor, Save Our Urban Lakes (SOUL)
H#12-2-389/A/72/A, Mahaveer Nagar
Karwan Sahu, Hyderabad - 500 006.
Telangana State.
...Applicant(s)
Versus
1) State of Telangana
Rep. by its Chief Secretary
Vice-Chairperson State WALTA Authority
Secretariat, B - Block, BRKR Bhavan
9th Floor Telangana,
Hyderabad - 500 004.
2) The Chairman - Lake Protection Committee
HMDA, Block A, District Commercial Complex,
Tarnaka, Telangana, Hyderabad - 500 007.
3) Special Chief Secretary,
I & CAD Government of Telangana
State WALTA Authority, 6th Floor, C Block,
BRBK Bhavan Telangana, Hyderabad - 500 004.
4) The District Collector - Rangareddy
Chairperson District WALTA Authority
Lakdikapool Road, Telangana,
Hyderabad - 500 004.
5) The Mandal Revenue Officer
Gandipet Mandal WALTA Authority
MRO Office, Gandipet Mandal,
Hyderabad, Telangana.
6) Secretary to Government in charge of Rural Development
Ex-Officio Member Secretary
Telangana State WALTA Authority
Zilla Prajaparishad Building, 2nd Floor,
Khairatabad, Telangana,
Hyderabad - 500 004.
7) Commissioner & Director Municipal Administration
Masab Tank Opp. PTI
Page 1 of 29
Hyderabad - 500 004.
8) Phoenix Spaces Private Limited
Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director
Plot No.1335, Road No.45,
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 033.
(8th respondent was impleaded as per order in I.A. No.12/2022 (SZ) dt.16.02.2022)
...Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): Dr. Lubna Sarwath (Party in Person).
For Respondent(s): Mrs. H. Yasmeen Ali along with
Mrs. Renukadevi for R1, R3 &R5 to R7.
Mr. T. Sai Krishnan along with
Ms. J. Dayana for R2.
Mr. Satish Parasaran, Senior Adv. for R4.
Mr. G. Vijayanand along with M/s. T.
Rajkumar, S. Kishore Kumar, Polkampally
Pavan Kumar Roa, P. Srikanth Rao, Sayantika
Sengupta, Meghna Sarma and S. Ganesh for R8.
Judgment Reserved on: 14th March 2023.
Judgment Pronounced on: 10th August, 2023
CORAM:
HON'BLE Smt. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
JUDGMENT
Delivered by Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member
1. The grievance in this Original Application is that the lake by name 'Narsingi Lake 2' in Narsingi Village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District of Telangana State which has been identified by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as „HMDA‟) and assigned Lake ID 2939 is being obliterated.
2. The entire lake which is said to be located in Sy. No.272, 273 and 276, as per the applicant, is levelled with blasted rock and construction debris. It was also stated that though the lake has been given ID 2939 and notified by the HMDA's Lake Protection Committeein year 2013, Maximum Water Spread (MWS) or FTL boundary maps and Cadastral map have not been uploaded on Page 2 of 29 website so far. Out of the 438 lakes which are surveyed and notified inside Outer Ring Road (ORR), the FTL Map of the Narsingi Lake 2 is not available on the HMDA website.
3. The applicant claims that she has conducted field survey along with her colleagues on 12.07.2019 and found that the lake was annihilated by dumping boulders, construction material by creating enclosed area and concretization inside the lake. Trucks were lining up to fill the lake. According to the applicant, encroachment in Narsingi Lake started from 2016 onwards and complete lake filling with boulder debris started in 2019.
4. The applicant states that after the field survey, she sent a People's Notice invoking the powers u/s 23(1) to (5) & 34(3) of the Water, Land and Trees Act (WALTA), 2002 on 14.07.2019 to the WALTA Authority for restoring the HMDA Lake ID 2939 Narsingi Lake 2 and also take action against the parties who are levelling the lake and against the officials who have not acted in good faith, as per WALTA Act sections.
5. It was also claimed that their e-SOS was emailed to the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi on 28.07.2019. But in spite of the same, construction activities are going on in the lake. The destruction of the lake along with its structure has caused further loss to the downstream lake Muskin Cheruvu, another notified lake and also to the Bulkapur Nalah that flows north of the lake from west to east i.e. from Osman Sagar to Hussain Sagar.
6. It is alleged that instead of increasing the rainwater holding capacity of the lakes in the city, most of the lakes in the Hyderabad City are Page 3 of 29 being allowed to be dumping yards. It was also pointed that in one of their ongoing case for restoration of a heritage water body called ‗Bum-Rukn-ud-Dowla' at Hyderabad, the Government Agency viz.,the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as „GHMC‟) has informed the Tribunal that they do not need to restore water bodies as drinking water resource, as they are implementing Mission Bhagiratha Drinking Water Scheme which clearly displays the myopic and anti-environmental and anti-people approach and therefore, they seek intervention of this Tribunal to restore the Narsingi Lake 2 as an emergency basis.
7. The applicant has made out the above case on the following grounds:-
7.1 Right to life with dignity that entails that each person receives a basic minimum of 135 litres of water per person per day cannot be ensured in Hyderabad when its lakes, ponds, wells, river are actively being dumped and destroyed.
7.2 Narsingi Lake 2 has been identified and notified on multiple data source as noted below:-
a. National Remote Sensing Centre geo-platform. b. Notified in Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority list of Lakes.
c. Demarcated in Hyderabad Urban Development Authority Master Plan.
d. Demarcated in HMDA Master Plan 2031. e. Demarcated in Bhuvan's Survey of India Topomaps. f. Digital Surveys using Google earth and Field Surveys corroborate official information regarding existence of lake.
7.3 The HMDA Master Plan 2031 records Narsingi Lake 2 at Sy.
No.272, 273 and 276 of Narsingi Village, Puppalaguda Zone, and Lake ID 2939 is accorded to this lake by the HMDA. 7.4 Filed Survey conducted by the applicant and her team. Page 4 of 29 7.5 Digital Survey Documentation with chronologically arranged historical satellite imageries from Google earth of HMDA Lake ID 2939 Narsingi Lake 2 from 2014 to 2019 indicates that in Google earth satellite imagery, the water body is still alive even as on 21.05.2019, but damaged by the encroachers and due to apathy of the officials.
8. The applicant filed this application seeking the following reliefs:-
i. Restoration of Narsingi Lake2, and its hydrology including Bulkapur Channel that flows across the northern boundary of the lake from west to east. Demarcation of inflow/outflow channels, FTL boundary and buffer zone. Fencing of lake at its buffer zone boundary. Lake reviving plantations in buffer zone as a social and biological fencing for protection of lake. Put up lake details including area, volume and water quality on a big signboard and on website along with the official and department responsible for maintenance of the lake. ii. Repeal any notifications issued for change of land use from water body zone.
iii. Proceed against officials and agencies that did not revive the water body but instead destroyed the water body depriving water to humanity and bio diversity. Deprived ground water replenishing. Officials have contempted Supreme Court orders.
9. While admitting the matter, on 21.05.2020, this Tribunal had directed the Joint Committee which was constituted in a similar case viz., Original Application No.39 of 2020 (SZ) to look into the issue involved in this case also and directed them to submit a status as well as action taken report.
10. The applicant has filed additional affidavits dated 26.07.2021 and 13.08.2021 and claimed that the Environmental Clearance (EC) granted on 15.09.2020 to the Phoenix Global Space Private Limited is after the case filed on 08.02.2020 and the orders of the National Green Tribunal, Southern Zone, Chennai on 21.05.2020 with scant regard to the Tribunal's order to undertake the joint inspection of the lake and report the action taken, if any violations are noticed. It was also claimed that the location of the project site was misrepresented on the topo sheet submitted for obtaining the Environmental Page 5 of 29 Clearance, the site area shown west of the lake demarcated on the Survey of India Topo Sheet No.56K/7 and as a result, the site area is overlaid on inflow channels of Narsingi Lake and also on the Bulkapur Channel and on the bund of the Bulkapur Channel north of the site area.
11. Thus, it is evident that officials have not only accorded permission for construction on a notified lake but also approved false representation of the project proponent. The applicant also claims that though the Environmental Clearance report itself contained a topo sheet file demarcating the project area with water body to its right touching its boundary, two inflow channels through its project area, Bullkapur Channel flowing through the project area and bund of the Bulkapur Channel on North and buffer zone of the abutting lake is also within the project area, yet the EC report has stated NO to ―Details of presence of water bodies in core area‖.
12. The applicant has also claimed that the outflow channel of Narsingi Lake joins the outflow channel of adjacent Muskin Cheruvu and finally drains into the Musi River that is further down of the Narsingi Lake. The chain of collection of storm water and surplus drain in the area has been broken due to the destruction of the Narsingi Lake and its channels and due to dumping of debris in the Bulkapur Channel. Therefore, the Environmental Clearance for construction of the project violates three body structures viz., Bulkapur Channel, bund of Bulkapur Channel, Narsingi Lake 2 and its channel and bund of Narsingi Lake.
13. The applicant also claimed that after 07.11.2020 floods in Hyderabad, it was noted that the entire road in front of Narsingi Lake Page 6 of 29 was flooded and water was continuously being drained out from the Narsingi Lake enclosed area with Phoenix hoardings and Lybra Construction hoardings. The applicant has also relied on the historical satellite imagery from Google earth to demonstrate the extent of lake, its hydrology and extent of devastation of multiple water bodies. The applicant further submitted that though the HMDA has given a Lake ID 2939 with geo-coordinates, HMDA has failed to issue the FTL Boundary Map / Cadastral Map and it is also observed from the extract that there are two asterisks against Lake ID 2939 Narsingi Lake 2 with comment that ―** This lake is not recorded in the Revenue Records and also not existing on the field (as reported by the Collector)". The applicant admits that lake is not recorded in the Village Cadastral Map, but the claim that the lake is not existing on the field as reported by the Collector is contrary to the facts on ground. The applicant has also relied on the satellite imageries of NRSC centre and claimed that "Pink lines are cadastral map imposed by the NRSC on satellite imagery ...... ... indicate the raw water conduit carrying raw drinking water from Usman Sagar to Asifnagar filter beds".
14. The applicant also submits that the Village Cadastral Map obtained from the NRSC centre also indicates the Bulkapur Channel and raw water body conduit flowing from West, North and Eastern direction of the Narsingi Lake and the raw water conduit is also observed. The applicant also states that as per the draft guidelines for fixation of FTLs for the lakes and water bodies all evidences from NRSC, Survey of India Topo Sheets, field visits, and final logic and reason have to be applied for conservation of water bodies. The above guidelines are totally in line with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hinch Lal Tiwari‟s case where the Hon'ble Supreme Court had Page 7 of 29 ordered the Revenue Officials to restore the water bodies even if they are in disuse and to conserve them for life to sustain and to protect life from the climate emergencies. So, the applicant prayed that:
i. EC and CFE and all affiliated permissions given for the construction in the extent of Narsingi Lake 2 may be cancelled and all the constructions may be halted immediately.
ii. Ordered for demolition and restoration of water body. iii. Identification of the FTL Boundary/ Maximum Water Spread and buffer zone boundary and the hydrology and structures of Narsingi Lake 2, Bulkapur Channel and raw water conduit, on ground as per the guidelines of the Lake Protection Committee/HMDA and prepare a time bound action plan for restoration of the lake.
iv. A judicial probe into all the commissions and omissions of officials involved in giving the EC based on the false information.
v. Take action against the respondents and project proponent who have been found guilty of malafide besides taking action against the SEIAA - Telangana and SEAC - Telangana for granting ECs for projects on water bodies which amounts to not acting in good faith and dereliction of duty.
15. The 4th Respondent/District Collector has filed reply dated 15.03.2021 contending that A team comprising of Revenue &Irrigation officials have inspected Narsingi Lake -2 (Lake Id No 2939) falling in Sy Nos 272 to 274 of Puppalguda Village, Gandipet Mandal and the said inspection revealed that the said Narsingi Lake -- 2 (Lake Id No 2939) is situated adjacent (South side) to Bulkapur Nala which is a disused Nala and on Northern side to Osman Sagar lake water pipe line. As per the Village map, there is no water body existed in the location and recorded as "Patta lands." Further, during the physical inspection as well, there is no water body found existing Page 8 of 29 in the said location. As per Survey of India Topo sheet, a dry pond is shown in the location and mapping is done by collecting Geo- coordinates from Topo sheet (E44M7) and arrived to an extent of Ac 8-00 gts. Further, as observed from Google map from the year 2003, there is an impression of small water body in Sy. Nos 272 to 274 of Puppalguda Village, Gandipet Mandal (The Google maps for the years 2003, 2010, 2015 & 2020 are enclosed). The Tahsildar, Gandipet Mandal, Municipal Commissioner, Narsingi Municipality and Executive Engineer, I & CADD, IB Division, Hyderabad were directed to keep strict vigil on the lake and ensure that no further construction/demolition waste is deposited in the lake and if there is any violation, directed to take necessary action on the persons under relevant act/rules and report compliance in the matter.
The State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority has reported that, the company has submitted its proposal along with detailed report, maps and presentation in the State Level Appraisal Committee (SEAC) meeting held on 18-084715, 17- 11-2018 & 09-12-2015 and after examination of the site position and impact on environment in accordance with EIA Notification, 2006, the SEAC & SEIAA has issued the Environmental Clearance vide No. SEIAA/TS/RRD-71/2015, dated 31-12-2015 to the project. Further, it is to submit that the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Govt. of India vide SEIAA/TS/OL/RRD-576/2020 dt. 06.08.2020 has informed that the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) granted permission for Commercial Office Complex in favour of M/s. Phoenix Global Spaces Pvt., Ltd., in Sy Nos 272/1, 273/1 of Puppalguda Village, Gandipet Mandal."
As per instructions of the Metropolitan Commissioner & Chairman, Lake Protection Committee, HMDA vide Lr. No. 985/ML/M3/HMDA/Dev/2013 dt. 17.11.2018 the District Level Committee with the District Level Officers of Irrigation, Revenue, Police, HMWS&SB, Pollution Control Board, Urban Local Bodies, etc was formed to take up conservation and effective protection of lakes/water bodies and necessary instructions were issued for removal of encroachments if any and Page 9 of 29 prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to dismiss the case and pass such further or other orders as deemed fit.
16. The 4th Respondent/District Collector has filed a further report dated 20.10.2022 as follows:-
―1. By the Orders of this Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A. No. 72 of 2020 dated 14-07-2022, the Joint Committee (comprising of District Collector, Rangareddy, a Senior official from Ministry of Environment Forests and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) , Regional Office, Chennai and Senior Officer from Lake Protection Commission) was directed to submit a further report on or before 17-08-2022, after a. Verifying the Satellite Imageries of the relevant area for a period of time including the time at which the master plan was prepared by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), to ascertain as to whether any evidence to show that the area has been shown and seen as water spread area. The imageries of this area to be captured must be for the period both during the monsoon as well non monsoon season.
b. Verifying the pre-independence revenue records relating to this area to ascertain the classification of land that has been mentioned for these survey numbers at that time and when the changes were effected if it was shown as water body at that time.
c. Conducting inspection at the location in question, in which the District Collector, Rangareddy shall participate and verify the records and the Satellite images as directed by this Hon'ble Tribunal and if required, to seek assistance of National Remote Sensing Centre, Hyderabad (NRSC,Hyderabad) for this purpose and to submit a further report along with the Survey of India Topo Sketch mentioned by the District Collector, Rangareddy District in his Reply submitted before this Hon'ble Tribunal on 15-03-2021 with satellite images from the year 1990 onwards with a gap of every 5 years (monsoon and non-monsoon periods) for the purpose of identifying whether the area is a water body or not.
2. In pursuance of the aforementioned Order of this Hon'ble Tribunal, the NRSC, Hyderabad at the request of the District Collector, Hyderabad, furnished the satellite images the said maps in respect of Longitude 17°24'5.54"N and Latitude 78°21'22.85"E, for the period 1990 onwards with a gap of every 5 years (monsoon and non--monsoon periods).
3. The Joint Committee consisting of District Collector, Rangareddy District along with other Committee Members, as directed by this Hon'ble Tribunal, perused and verified the Satellite images furnished by the NRSC, Hyderabad from 1990 every 5 years monsoon and non-monsoon periods of the area covering Longitude 17°24'5.54"N and Latitude 78°21'22.85"E, which corresponds to Survey No. 271, 272 Page 10 of 29 and 273 of Puppalguda Village, Gandipet Mandal, Rangareddy District. Upon examination of the satellite images made available by the NRSC, Hyderabad, no lake or water body is noticed in the said location under question.
4. As regards, verification of the revenue records pertaining to the Pre-Independence period, it is informed that there are no such Pre Independence recordsavailable in the State of Telangana, but the Sethwar' which is considered as the Pre eminent official record for survey and settlement of lands in the State is available. Besides Sethwar, the Pahanis and village maps are the other important records relied upon for all the Revenue purposes.The original Sethwar and subsequent pahanis and the village maps prepared in the year 1942, in respect of the Location in question, shows that the land in survey numbers 272,273 and 274 of the Poppalaguda Village, Serilingampally mandal of Ranga Reddy District are classified as a Patta Land', which was under cultivation and assessed as 'Dry Land' for the revenue purpose.
5. The Municipal Administration & Urban Development Dept. (MA&UD) of Government of Andhra Pradesh vide Gazette notification dated 04-02-2010 revised the draft variation of the Master Plan of HMDA for change of land use of the land from partly water body use and partly recreational use to Multipurpose use in respect of the land in Survey No. 271 to 274 of Poppalaguda Village. The said draft variation was implemented vide GO. Ms.No.260 dated 26-10-2019 issued by the Municipal Administration & Urban Development Dept. The said notification and G.0 also state that the lands in question are Patta Lands and there are no water bodies existing in the said survey nos. as per Revenue Records.
6.During physical inspection of the site under question, it is noticed that part of the location falling in Sy. No. 272 is -
dug up for cellars for construction of the proposed SEZ project for which all construction approvals have been obtained by M/s Phoenix Global Spaces Pvt Ltd. Rest of the land in adjacent survey numbers did not yield any evidence of a water body.
7. It is pertinent to mention that the Superintendent Engineer, Hyderabad Lakes &Water Bodies Management Circle, Telangana, has inspected the site in Sy. Nos 271 to 274 on 30-07-2013 and observed that though Survey of India map shows an indication of existence of water body in the said land without exhibiting the water colour in it, and that the low ground, slushy in condition in the said site might be due to the diversion of the water into the said site from the Bulkapur nala (Disused Canal) whose continuity was disturbed at the time of construction of ORR and service road without connecting the Bulkapur Nala, owing to which water might be stagnating in the said site.
8. The Committee also examined various observations made by the Tribunal in its order as to :
Page 11 of 29
a) the variance between the Reply filed by the District Collector, received on 15-03-2021 and the Joint Committee Inspection Report dated 25-03-2022.
b) the basis of preparation of lake list with lake IDs and the process of notification of the lakes
9. Upon examination of the District Collectors reply submitted to the Hon'ble Tribunal, it is noticed that it was prepared based on the observations in the Inspection Report dated 24-07-2020.1t is seen that the para. 1 of the report viz., "The said Narsingi lake -2 (HMDA Tank ID No. 2939) is situated adjacent (south side) to the Bulkapur nala which is a disused nala and North side to the Osman Sagar lake water pipeline. "and the Location sketch attached to the report together created confusion giving an impression that the lake is actually existing and situated at such location, although the rest of the report and the conclusion is otherwise. When the report is read in entirety, it appears that the sentence should have started with "THE LOCATION OF' which could have brought clarity to the intent of the sentence-.The revised sentence could read as "The Location of the said Narsingi lake -2 (HMDA Tank ID No. 2939) is situated adjacent (south side) to the Bulkapur nala which is a disused nala and North side to the Osman Sagar lake water pipeline." The location sketch was also prepared for the same purpose of indicating the alleged location.
10. However, the Inspection Report clearly states that as per the Village Revenue Map, there is no water body existing in the said location and as per Sethwar and Pahanis the said land has been recorded as Patta land for cultivation, and also that as per the physical verification, there exists no water body at the said location. The Joint Committee Inspection Report and the Reply of the District Collector, when read together reconciles and conforms with each other. Therefore, the Joint Committee observes that there is no conflict between the Joint Inspection Report and the Reply of the District Collector, Ranga Reddy. apparently, poor drafting of the 1st para of the report caused all the confusion.
12. The very first step in the process is to give a lake ID to the lakes identified from the GIS/ Satellite data. The lake ID is to be corrected based on the feedback received. In the instant case, the lake ID 2939 and the name Narsingi lake-2 was given to a particular location on the GIS map. It's a well-known fact that, in Telangana State lake names end with Cheruvu/Kunta/Talab but not an English word like Lake, much less Lake-2. Further, while naming the unidentified locations, temporary names like Narsingi Lake-1,2,3 etc with lake IDs were given. The location of the said Narsingi lake-2 falls in Poppalaguda village and not in Narsingi, the neighboring village. Further, after the preliminary survey, the consultants have reported back stating that the lake is not recorded in the Revenue Records and also -not existing on the field as reported by the Collector". This goes to show that the said Narsingi lake-2 with lake ID 2939 is neither existing Page 12 of 29 physically on the field nor in the Irrigation and Revenue Records (i.e., Pahanis) and therefore, it has not even been notified preliminarily.
13) After numerous such cases being noticed the State Government reversing the earlier process followed by HMDA, issued a GO vide GOMs. No. 74 dated 24-04-2021 appointing Additional Collectors of Districts as Nodal Officers to identify lakes based on the Revenue & Irrigation records/ and after field survey, superimpose the same on GIS maps to resolve or reconcile the discrepancies. Such exercise is in progress.
17. The 8th respondent - M/s. Phoenix Global Spaces Pvt. Ltd. has filed reply contending that 17.1 T h e A p p l i c a n t h e r e i n i s g u i l t y o f S u p p r e s s i o Veri and Suggestio Falsi, in as much as the Applicant herein resorted to deliberate and wilful concealment of facts and made false representations before this Hon'ble Tribunal as against the answering Respondent, more so by way of filing the Additional Applications, by unsuccessfully attempting to improve her case stage-wise and misleading this Hon'ble Tribunal and also has the reliefs sought therein are against the extant provisions of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 ("NGT Act, 2010"). The Applications filed by the Applicant are not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed.
17.2 At the outset it is stated that the Applicant has initially through her Application dated 03-03-2020 had filed for restoration of Narsingi Lake-2 amongst other reliefs. Thereafter, the Applicant having understood that there was no fit case made out, at the later stage, filed Additional Applications dated 03-08-2022 and 10-07-2022 inter alia making various allegations in respect of the Answering Respondent and also sought reliefs in respect of cancellation of the various permissions granted to the Answering Respondent by various authorities, with an ulterior motive by making false allegations and vexatious claims and without proper verification of the records and without ascertaining ground situation over the years. The Page 13 of 29 Applicant is pleading a totally new case, which by itself is also factually incorrect.
17.3 Before answering the statements/averments/allegations of the Applicant in the said Applications, the answ ering Respondent respectfully submits that the very Additional Application filed in the present proceedings, is beyond the scope of the present proceedings and the reliefs sought are against the provisions of the NGT Act, 2010 and deserves to be rejected in limine.
17.4 The 8 th respondent is developing and constructing a commercial buildings project in Survey Nos. 272 and 273 totally admeasuring Ac.10 -20 Gts., situated at Puppalguda Village, Gandipet Mandal, RangaReddy District. The detailed title flow of the property as borne by official records would also establish that over the past more than 7 decades the said land was a `Patta' Land, as confirmed by the authorities on multiple occasions and that the land was under cultivation and no water body ever existed therein.
17.5 The 8 th respondent by virtue of the Development Agreement and Sale Deeds, derived the right, title and authority to develop and construct in the said land admeasuring Ac 10-20 Gts in Survey Nos. 272/1 and 273/2 of Pupplaguda Village and the Saleable / Leasable Area in the Project. It is also submitted that the subject land was always a Patta Land / Inam Land recognised under respective laws. The Sethwar and Pahani from the year 1950 onwards clearly reflects the owners names as pattadars, the Certificate of Ownership granted under S.38 E of the Tenancy Act, issued in favour of the predecessors in title of the Owners, way back in the year 1975. Even the Village map of Puppalguda village does not contain any depiction or mention of lake or water body in the subject land. In fact, there was extensive correspondence between the land owners / earlier developers of the subject land, with the Government Authorities wherein Page 14 of 29 time and again, inspections have been carried out and records were referred to on multiple occasions. 17.6 It was claimed by the respondent that in the year 2008, one of the predecessor in title of the land owners(Mr. D. S. Karunakar Reddy)made an Application to the District Collector, Rangareddy seeking NOC for change of land use from Recreational Use to Multiple Purpose Use and the District Collector had obtained reports of the Tahsildar, and the Executive Engineer -North Tanks Division, Irrigation Department and based on the reports, the District Collector had addressed a letter to the Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) (presently Hyderabad Me tr opolitan Develo pment Author ity / HMDA) vide Letter bearing No. E1 /2792/2008 dated 17.07.2008 to permit the change of land use from Recreational Zone to Multiple Use Zone. Subsequently, in the year 2013, after site visit on 31.05.2013 along with the Mandal Surveyor, the Executive Engineer, North Tanks Division had submitted a detailed Report to the Metropolitan Commissioner, HMDA in respect of the change in land use of subject land vide Letter bearing No. EE/ NTI/ DB/ DEE3/ HD/ 2013/ 1281/ 1/ 26 dated 06.08.2013 and report that a. The Bulkapur Nala is flowing from the western side of the site and passing along the northern boundary of the site. b. There is a BT Road on the southern side of the existing survey numbers with Gandipet water conduit line and Manjeera Water pipe line on either side of it.
c. There is Outer Ring Road and service road on the western side of the said survey nos.
d. The disused Nala is flowing from the west side of the site, which was disturbed due to the construction of the ORR and service road.
e. A culvert was constructed, but the continuity of the Nala is not maintained due to which the water is not flowing into the Nala and instead, it is flowing into the said site and stagnating in the low lying area of the site. f. That the Superintending Engineer had inspected the site in Sy. No's. 271 to 274 on 30.07.2013 and it was further reiterated that the low ground slushy in condition in the said site might have been caused due to the diversion of the water into the said site from the Bulkapur Nala (disused canal), Nala's continuity was disturbed at the time of construction of ORR and service road without connecting the Bulkapur Nala, owing to which water is stagnating in the said site. Page 15 of 29 g. That, as per Pahanis, the subject land is shown as Patta Lands and there are no water bodies in the said lands. 17.7 Further, the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division No. 1, Hyderabad has issued NOC Lr. No. EE/ Irrg.Div no.1/ HYD/ DB/ DEE-T/ EE/ D3/ 2021-22/ 1131 dated 17.08.2021 for survey Nos. 271 to 273 situated at Poppalaguda village, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy Dist, along with the Location Sketch submitted by the Tahsildar of Gandipet mandal RR District duly attested showing 9.00 meters buffer zone from the revenue boundary of Bulkapur Nala on the North side and 30.00 meters buffer zone area from the Gandipet Raw Water intake on the south side of the applicant land as per village map in the afore said survey numbers subject to the following terms and conditions.
"a. Will not be allowed any kind of constructions in Bulkapur Nala and Gandipet raw water intake and its bu ffer zon e area which is clearly demarcated in the revenue sketch map submitted by the Mandal Surveyor and Tahsildar of Gandipet Mandal Ranga Reddy district. The buffer zone area has to be left for greenery only.
b. Will not be allowed any kind of dumping or throwing of garbage or any kind of materials.
c. Any kind of sewage or any kind of effluents should not be allowed."
The project is being implemented strictly as per the above NOC and terms and conditions stipulated therein.
18. From the above pleadings, the questions that arise for consideration are:
(i) Whether there is Narsingi Lake-2 including Bulkapur Channel as claimed by the applicant?
(ii) If so whether the demarcation of the inflow or flow channel has been done including the FTL boundary and buffer zone?
19. Even on the date of admission of the Original Application, this Tribunal has appointed a Joint Committee which included the District Collector, an Officer from the Revenue Department, an Officer from the MoEF&CC and an Officer from the Lake Protection Committee to inspect the area in question and submit a report. Page 16 of 29
20. The Joint Committee has originally filed a report on 21.02.2022 along with certain documents. The Committee has referred to the letter from the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation and CAD Department dated 24.05.2008 addressed to the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. The said letter was in response to the request made by the District Collector, Rangareddy District to submit a detailed report in respect of water bodies' aspect in Sy. Nos. 271 to 274 of Puppalguda Village, Ragendranagar Mandal. The said letter has mentioned that as per the physical verification in Sy. Nos. 271 to 274 of Puppalguda Village there are no water bodies existing. Along the periphery of north of the said survey numbers Bulkapur (Firangi nala) Nala is passing and at the south of the survey numbers road and pipeline are there. The said letter further had mentioned that there is one water body, Bhagirathamma Cheruvu and no other water body is in existence. Even as per the village map furnished by the District Collector there are no water bodies in Sy Nos. 271 to
274.
21. The second document referred by the Joint Committee is from the District Collector, Rangareddy District to the Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) dated 17.07.2008. For the clarification sought for by the Vice Chairman, HUDA, the Joint Collector-I has stated that after enquiry through District Collector and Tahsildar, Rajendranagar Mandal, RDO, Chevella Division and E.E. North Tanks Division, Hyderabad it was reported that the lands in Survey numbers 271 to 274 to an extents Ac. 26-35 gts of Poppalguda Village, there are no water bodies in existence as per revenue records.
Page 17 of 29
22. The Gazette Extraordinary No. 54 MA-UD dated 04.02.2010 wherein objections were invited from the general public for the revised draft variation to the master plan of HMDA for change of land use of the land from partly water body use and recreational use to multipurpose use in Poppalguda village also had referred that there is no existing water body in the said survey numbers.
23. The next document referred to by the Joint Committee is dated 06.08.2013 from the Executive Engineer, North Tanks Division to the Metropolitan Commissioner, HMDA which considered the change of land use from the partly water body use in Sy. Nos. 271 to 274 of Poppalguda Village Rajendranagar Mandal. In the said letter the observations after inspection by the Deputy Executive Engineer on 31.05.2013 are mentioned as per which disused nala from the western side of the site was disturbed due to the construction of ORR and service road. A culvert was constructed but the continuity of the nala is not maintained due to which the water is not flowing into the nala instead it is flowing into the said site and stagnating in the low lying area of the site. Finding of the Superintending Engineer that there was indication of existence of water body is only due to the stagnation of the water due to the diversion of the water into the said site from the Bulkapur Nala whose continuity was disturbed at the time of the construction of the ORR and service road without connecting the Bulkapur Nala. Based on the strength of the inspection notes by the Superintending Engineer, the nala course shall be maintained as green buffer zone and no building activity other than recreation used shall be carried out within 09 m from the defined boundary of the nala by duly following the G.O. MS. No. 168 dated 17.04.2012 on the northern periphery of the site. Page 18 of 29
24. G.O. Ms. No. 240 dated 05.09.2019 MA and UD Department, the Government of Telengana had notified the lands in Sy. No. 271 to 274 to be included in adjoining industrial area, local authority for developing IT parks, SEZ/ITES office spaces. G. No. 260 dated 26.10.2019 MA and UD Department had notified the change of land use of the lands in SF. Nos. 271 to 274 from partly water body and partly recreational to multipurpose use zone. The village map of the Poppalguda village furnished by the office of the District Collector, Rangareddy District, there is no mention about the lake or water body in the area in question. The list of lakes identified by HMDA refers to Narsingi Lake-2 without the survey numbers details following in Narsingi Village and given a lake ID No. 2939 with the foot note saying this lake is not recorded in the revenue records and is not existing on the field as reported by the Collector. The Joint Committee had gone through all the above referred documents and found that they are private patta lands and there is no lake or water body in the said lands as per the Revenue, Irrigation and HMDA except for the HMDA Master Plan.
25. Even the Joint Committee which upon physical inspection has found that there was no lake or water body found in the said area and there is no dumping of demolition waste. Historically these lands were under paddy cultivation which might have been stopped due to urbanization of surrounding areas. The Bulkapur Nala is seen flowing from west to east on north side of the site and the nala is found intact without any encroachments or dumping of debris. The Committee has only recommended that the buffer zone along the nala shall be demarcated and maintained as per G.O Ms. No. 168 dated 07.04.2012.
Page 19 of 29
26. The Joint Committee has filed its 2nd report dated 18.08.2022 where it was directed to verify the satellite imageries of the relevant area for a period of time including the time at which the master plan was prepared by the HMDA. It was also directed to verify the pre- independence revenue records relating to this area to ascertain the classification of the land. The Joint Committee had verified the satellite images furnished by the National Remote Sensing Centre, Hyderabad (NRSC) from 1990 every 05 years, monsoon and non- monsoon periods with the given longitude and latitude corresponding to SF. Nos. 271 to 274 Puppalguda Village. Upon examination of the satellite images no lake or water body is located on the said location under question. Regarding the pre-independence revenue records, it is informed that there are no records available in the State of Telengana. But the Sethwar which is considered as the prominent office record for survey and settlement of lands in the State is available. Besides, Sethwar, the Pahanis and village maps are the other important records relied upon for all the revenue purposes. The original Sethwar and subsequent Pahanis and the Village maps prepared in the year 1942, in respect of the location in question shows that the land in SF. Nos. 271 to 274 of the Poppalaguda Village are classified as patta lands which was under cultivation and assessed as dry land for the revenue purpose.
27. The master plan section of the HMDA has prepared a list of lakes with the help of GIS map and satellite imageries and had given unique lake IDs. The lake IDs has to be corrected based on the feedback received. In the instant case, the ID no. 2939 under the name Narsingi was given to the particular location on the GIS Map. It is stated that in the State of Telengana lake names end with Cheruvu/Kunta/Talab but not an English word like lake, much less Lake-2/ While naming the Page 20 of 29 unidentified locations, temporary names like Narsingi Lake-1, 2,3 etc., for the lake IDs were given. The location of Narsingi Lake-2 falls in Poppalaguda and not in Narsingi Village. After the preliminary survey, the consultants have reported that the lake is not recorded in the revenue records and also not existing on the field as reported by the Collector. This goes to show that the said Narsingi Lake-2 with ID No. 2939 is neither existing physically on the field nor in the irrigation and revenue record. Therefore, it has not been notified preliminarily. In view of such findings, the State Government reversed the earlier process followed by the HMDA and issued a G.O Ms. No. 74 dated 24.04.2021 appointing Additional Collectors of Districts as nodal officers to identify the lakes based on the revenue and irrigation records and after field survey, superimpose the same on GIS maps to resolve or reconcile the discrepancies. The said exercise is said to be in process. Therefore, the Joint Committee has concluded that there is not water body in the said SF. Nos. 271 to 274 of Poppalguda Village at any point of time as corroborated by the satellite images furnished by the NRSC, Hyderabad, Google maps, Irrigation and revenue records mentioned above.
28. Thus, the report of the Joint Committee has categorically found that there is no water body in the SF. Nos. 271 to 274 of Poppalguda Village at any point of time and that the State machineries have taken by the task of identifying the lakes based on the revenue and irrigation records once the said exercise is completed lake protection committee will take care.
29. The report of the District Collector is already reflected in the Joint Committee report as he was part of the Joint Committee. Page 21 of 29
30. The 8th respondent, who is the project proponent, while denying all the reasons stated in the Original Application in support of the cause of action has stated that SY. Nos. 272 and 273 measuring 10.20 acres situated in Puppalguda Village is being developed by them. According to them it is patta land as confirmed by the authorities on several occasions as land was under cultivation and no water body existed ever. It was reiterated that the subject land was always patta land recognized under respective laws. The said Sethwar and Pahanis from the year 1950 onwards clearly reflect the owners names as pattedars. Even in the village map of Puppalguda does not contain any depiction or mention of lake or water body in the subject land. The project proponent also has referred to the letters of the Deputy Collector dated 21.05.2008 and the report from the Executive Engineer, North Tank Division, Irrigation Department wherein the Executive Engineer had issued a reply vide the letter dated 24.05.2008 in which he has categorically stated that a physical inspection was conducted on the site at Sy. No. 271 to 274 and there were no water body existed in the said survey number. The only water body that was available in the Puppalaguda Village is Bhagirathamma Cheruvu. The 8th respondent placed reliance only on the correspondence which was referred to by the Joint Committee. The 8th respondent further has stated that even as per the District Collector's reports there is no water body and it is recorded as patta lands during the physical inspection.
31. It is further stated that the master plan of HMDA is being revised by collecting the various anomalies by appointment of nodal officers which goes to show that the master plan is being revised. Since, the Government Order G.O. Ms. No. 260 dated 26.10.2019 is already issued by the State Government confirming the change in land use to multipurpose use after carrying out extensive verification through Page 22 of 29 various departments the reference to the water body in the master plan is of no relevance as the changed land use is being certified by the same authority. Even the lake ID No. 2939 is referred as non- existence.
32. The 8th respondent also strongly places reliance on the inter- departmental correspondence relying upon which they had entered into a development agreement with the land owners and obtained all statutory permissions and approvals and started executing the development work on the said land by deploying the resources. Hence it was argued that the allegations of the applicant would not hold water.
33. Though it is stated by the applicant that the Narsingi Lake-2 is identified on Google Earth the same is not supported by the Revenue records. The HMDA is in the process of official documentation of the lakes. The said Narsingi Lake-2 is given a ID no. 2939 however, the survey number on which the said lake is situated is not mentioned. Even the applicant though has stated that the Sy. No. 272 and 276 of Narsingi village is a water body there is no supporting document to the said effect furnished. The inter-departmental correspondence of the Government and also the physical verification by the Joint Committee which also comprised different official from the various departments categorically found that there is no water body available as on date.
34. It is also submitted by the project proponent that the Applicant through her Additional Applications, sought additional reliefs in respect of the various permissions granted by authorities in favour of the answering Respondent. The Applicant cannot be permitted to expand the scope of the present Appl ication. It is Page 23 of 29 submitted that most of the maps / permissions submitted by the Applicant either in her Application or in the Additional Applications contain text such as "water body" / "Narsingi lake - 2", etc in "typed text" which are nothing but interpolations made by the Applicant on the public data available on public domains which have been filed by her in the present Application through her Additional Affidavits in respect of the subject land or of the permissions of the answering Respondent, only with a purposive and malicious motive to cause prejudice to the answering Respondent in the eyes of this Hon'ble Tribunal. Such wilful interpolations on the public records must be dealt with in strictest terms so as to ensure that the Applicant approaches any forum, including this Hon'ble Tribunal only with clean hands and undisputed facts. The Application deserves dismissal on this ground alone.
35. The applicant makes allegations based on the Google Map Images, Topo Map, and the Master Plan of HMDA.However, the fact that the Master Plan of HMDA is being revised by correcting the various anomalies by appointment of Nodal Officers, which goes to show that the Master Plan is to be revised. Since a Government Order (G.O.Ms. No. 260 dated 26-10-2019) is already issued by the State Government confirming the change in Land Use to Multipurpose Use after carrying out extensive verifications thorough various departments, the said reference to water body in the master plan (which is admittedly an error and without following established procedure) is of no relevance as the changed land use is being certified by the same authority, does not warrant any interference and the Applicant cannot be permitted to take advantage of isolated incidence of error by Page 24 of 29 filing such Applications. In respect of the listing of the purported lake with Lake ID 2939, the same is self explanatory as nonexistent and also in view of the process already mentioned by the Joint Committee in its Report, especially when there is no notification by the Lakes Committee to that effect.
36. The specific case of the applicant is that the inlet channels to the lake have also been obliterated by the project proponent. The applicant also relied on the National Remote Sensing Centre geo-platform, the list of lakes notified by the HMDA, HUDA master plan, HMDA master plan 2031, Bhuvan's survey of India Topomaps, digital survey using Google Earth and Field survey etc., to show that the SF. Nos. 271, 272 and 276 are part of the Narsingi Lake-2. It was further contended that the Environmental Clearance granted to the 8th respondent was also issued without considering the proposed construction on the water body. To be noted is that the said Environmental Clearance is not put to challenge till now.
37. So in the absence of the pre-independence records in the State of Telengana, the Sethwar was considered as pre-eminent official records for survey and settlement of land in the State. Perusal of the original Sethwar and subsequent Pahanis and Village Maps prepared in the year 1942 shows that the land in Sy. Nos. 272, 273 and 274 of Puppalguda Village are classified as patta land which was under
cultivation and were assessed as dry land for the revenue purposes.
38. As observed supra, the Gazette notification and the draft variation of the master plan of HMDA allowed for change of land use of the land from partly water body use and partly recreational use to Multipurpose use in respect of lands in Sy. No.271 to 274 of Puppalaguda Village by Page 25 of 29 the G.O. Ms. No.260 dated 20.10.2019. The contention of the applicant cannot be considered and none of the G.Os are put to challenge by the applicant.
39. From the reports of the official respondents and also that of the Joint Committee, it is evident that the State itself has taken up the task of identifying the lakes and the protection of the same by appointing nodal officers due to the discrepancies in the certification of FTL of lakes/water bodies/tanks by the Irrigation Department and certification of correction of survey numbers of the corresponding lakes/water bodies/tanks by the Revenue Department and issued final notification till such time the process is completed and the Narsingi Lake-2 as claimed by the applicant is demarcated and notified, direction cannot be issued by this Tribunal. As already mentioned supra, the applicant has not challenged any of the G.O issued for change of land use from water body zone and this Tribunal cannot repeal the notification in the absence of any specific challenge to the same.
40. The survey of India map which shows the indication of the water body is also found to be due to the diversion of the water into the site from Bulkapur Nala whose continuity was disturbed at the time of construction of ORR and the service road without connecting the Bulkapur Nala. Above all, though the HMDA had listed the Narsingi Lake-2 and in the foot note it is specifically stated that ―this lake is not recorded in the Revenue Records and also not existing on the field (as reported by the Collector)‖.
41. From the above, it is evident that the contention of the applicant that there existed a lake by name Narsingi Lake 2 is not substantiated by Page 26 of 29 the revenue and other Government records. Moreover, a verification of the satellite imageries by the District Collector as well as the Joint Committee in conjunction with field inspection reveals that in the said survey numbers, there is no lake by name Narsingi Lake 2. The fact that there is no mention of the water body in the said survey numbers is evident in the note of notification of the HMDA relied upon by the applicant. Therefore, we hold that in Sy. Nos.271, 272, 273 & 274, as reported by the Revenue Authorities and the Joint Committee, there is no water body or lake and Issue No.1 is held accordingly.
42. In as much as the claim of the presence of water body in Sy. No.271 to 274, where the 8th respondent is undertaking his project, is not substantiated by the revenue records, the question of construction of their project in the water body does not arise. Moreover, the project proponent has assured that he will abide by the terms and conditions imposed by the Irrigation Department while granting the NOC for the construction of the project and will not put up any structures in the buffer zone as stipulated in the NOC. In as much as the project proponent is constructing the impugned project after obtaining necessary clearance from various authorities, it cannot be said that it is being constructed in a water body or in a buffer zone.
43. It is also to be noted that the construction of the said project in the said survey numbers, for which, the EC has also been obtained is being undertaken after obtaining necessary approvals from various Government Agencies, including the Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department. Neither the said land use conversion orders of the Government issued in the year 2019 has been challenged by the applicant nor that can be entertained by this Tribunal for want of jurisdiction.
Page 27 of 29
44. In view of the detailed discussions made above, we hold that no case could be made out that there existed a lake viz., Narsingi Lake 2 in Sy. Nos.272, 273 & 276 of Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, State of Telangana. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant to restore the Narsingi Lake 2 in Sy. Nos.272, 273 & 276 is not legally feasible.
45. However, in view of the G.O Ms. No. 74 Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department dated 24.04.2021 wherein Additional Collectors have been appointed for Rangareddy, Medchal-Malkagiri, Yadadri-Bhongiri, Medak, Sangareddy Districts as Nodal Officers and entrusted with the responsibility of field work of the lake protection committee showing the lakes to the consultants physically resolving the discrepancies/errors in FTL maps of Irrigation Department and revenue statement and cadastral maps of Revenue Department, it is open to the applicant to approach the appropriate nodal officers and express her grievance. This liberty is given because the said work is not yet complete. However, any work in pursuance to the G.O. would be prospective.
46. In view of the above discussion, the Original Application is dismissed.
.......................................................J.M. (Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana) .......................................E.M. (Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati) Internet - Yes/No All India NGT Reporter - Yes/No O.A. No.72/2020 (SZ) 10th August, 2023. AM & MN.
Page 28 of 29
Before the National Green Tribunal Southern Zone (Chennai) O.A. No. 72 of 2020 Dr. Lubna Sarwath Vs. State of Telangana & Ors.
O.A No. 72/2020(SZ) 10th August,2023. (AM) Page 29 of 29