The Andhra Pradesh High Court refused to stay the demolitions being carried out by the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC) in the coastal regulation zone (CRZ-1) area near Bheemunipatnam. The court directed the GVMC to not yield to political pressure and ensure the removal of all illegal constructions from the ecologically sensitive area. The court had earlier ordered the GVMC to take action against illegal constructions following a public interest litigation (PIL) petition. The court rejected the arguments of the senior counsel, who claimed the construction was done with due permission in the CRZ-2 area.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court refused to halt the demolitions being carried out by the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC) in the coastal regulation zone (CRZ-1) area near Bheemunipatnam. The court directed the GVMC to not succumb to political pressure or considerations and ensure that all illegal constructions are removed from the ecologically sensitive area.
Earlier, the court had directed the GVMC to take steps to remove all illegal constructions in the CRZ-1 area after hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by Jana Sena corporator P Murthy Yadav.
Following the court's orders, the GVMC officials issued notices to Neha Reddy, the daughter of YSRCP Rajya Sabha MP V Vijaysai Reddy, for making illegal construction on the beach. The high court had previously declined to provide interim relief to Neha Reddy.
Arguing on her behalf, senior counsel Ponnavolu Sudhakar Reddy claimed that the construction was done with all necessary permissions in the CRZ-2 area, not in the CRZ-1 zone. He also argued that the petitioner had obtained interim orders without including Neha Reddy as a party respondent in the PIL, and that the allegation regarding the construction being in the CRZ-1 area was false.
Sudhakar Reddy stated that a petition challenging the notices for demolition is pending before a single judge of the High Court, and he sought interim orders to stay the demolitions until the petition is decided.
However, the High Court bench observed that the GVMC is demolishing illegal structures in the CRZ area as there are no interim orders restraining it from doing so. The bench also rejected the argument that the construction was made with all permissions in the CRZ-2 area, suggesting that the senior counsel should examine the photographs before arguing, as the house of Neha Reddy appears to be in the high tide zone.
The bench directed the senior counsel to approach the single judge on the issue of permissions and posted the matter for further hearing on September 25.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court's resolute stance on upholding the law and protecting the ecologically sensitive coastal zone is commendable. By refusing to stay the demolitions and directing the GVMC to remove all illegal constructions, the court has shown its commitment to safeguarding the environment and ensuring compliance with the coastal regulation laws. This ruling sets a precedent for responsible development and highlights the court's unwavering dedication to preserving the delicate balance of the CRZ-1 area, regardless of political considerations or individual interests.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
