29/01/2020
After 102-room Island Hotel, Is There Still a Plan to Save Udaisagar Lake?
The construction of the hotel by VEPL took place with flagrant violation of norms, including extending the area to cover the entire eight hectares of the island, even though permission to construct was only for a little over two hectares.
After 102-room Island
The Udaisagar Lake in Udaipur is spread over an area extending over 10 sq km. Situated about 10 km from the heart of Udaipur city, it is a man-made lake constructed around 1565 AD by Maharaja Udai Singh. Over the years, it has served as the home of a wide variety of birds and animals, with about 86 species of waterfowl and crocodiles. However, an eight-hectare piece of land that juts above the water and forms a shallow island in the lake is now at risk of becoming a five-star hotel and posing a serious threat to the lake and its biodiversity.
The lake, surrounded by the Aravalli hills, had remained pristine with little pressure from the surrounding population. Local farmers held tenancy rights to much of the land in the shallow island in the lake. During the monsoon, the island would be inundated; when water receded, some land would emerge.
Under the Master Plan of Udaipur, the lake island falls under the periphery control belt or green belt, where commercial activity is not permitted. In 2008, however, Mumbai-based firm Vardha Enterprise Pvt Limited, after acquiring the island from local peasants, sought permission from the Urban Improvement Trust of Udaipur to build a hotel. In violation of norms, agriculture land was converted to allow commercial activity.
In 2009, the state government changed land use for a good part of the island and allowed construction on 2.04 hectares of the total eight hectares of the island, after the water resources department noted that this area was above the high flood level marked in 1973.
Local environmentalists and citizens are worried that the spate of floods in urban centres in India in recent years—Srinagar, Chennai, Mumbai, Bangalore—could be repeated in Udaipur too, if such large construction is allowed in violation of laws. It is noteworthy that after the 2006 floods of Udaipur, the state government had filed appeals suo motu against pattas issued under Section 90 B of the state Land Revenue Act by the Urban Improvement Trust.
Bajrang Lal Sharma, retired state revenue board member, regrets that despite the existence of laws to protect such fragile zones and the stated policy of the state government to protect water bodies, the construction of the 102-room hotel on the island was permitted.
In 2007, the Rajasthan High Court had given directions for preservation of certain lakes in Udaipur city, and banned conversion of land and construction in and around lakes. In 2012, hearing a contempt petition in this matter, the High Court ordered demolition of the hotel and imposed a fine of Rs.1 crore on the hotelier. By 2010, Udaisagar was recognised as one of the seven lakes in the state that found mention in the National Wetlands Map.
By 2018, the hotel construction took up almost the entire eight hectares, even though permission to construct was only for a little over two hectares! A wall over 12 feet high was erected, preventing aquatic creatures from crawling onto the island to bask in the sun or lay eggs.
Local farmers feel cheated, as they had no notion that the land they gave up would become a five-star hotel. Down To Earth reported in November 2017 that agitations against the hotel had occurred in 14 villages near the site.
Jheel Sanrakshan Samiti, a local non-profit that has been fighting to save lakes in Udaipur, is opposing the five-star hotel in court. In an additional affidavit in the Supreme Court, JSS pointed out in a petition submitted to the SC in 2017 that clearances earlier granted to the Mumbai firm were subject to the final outcome in a Public Interest Litigation titled Gulab Kothari V/s State of Rajasthan and Others, which was pending in the Rajasthan HC at the time.
On January 12, 2017, the HC decided the Gulab Kothari matter, and ordered that the “sanctity of the Master Development Plan or the Zonal Development Plan finally sanctioned shall be maintained and all development schemes of the various zones and development work to be undertaken by local authorities or private entrepreneurs shall conform to land use as specified under the Master Development Plan or Zonal Development Plan, as the case may be.” The HC instructed authorities to be watchful and punish officials who work in connivance with those erecting unauthorised constructions.
It is noteworthy that in December 2014, the private firm had sought permission from the collector to construct a road on the dry river bed, leading to the hotel. The collector had refused permission. Despite the refusal, construction occurred. In 2016, the tehsildar issued eviction notices to the hotelier for constructing the road without permission.
However, with the large hotel now nearly completed, there is little hope that it will be demolished. The state government has also filed a petition in the SC stating that if the Master Plan is to be strictly adhered to, massive demolitions will have to take place.
Sharma, retired member of the state revenue board, remarked that flagrant violation of norms has gone unpunished in this case, and the encroachment of the lake could serve as a bad precedent for other lakes in the city.
“All approvals were subject to the final outcome of the Gulab Kothari case, and this was squarely governed by the High Court. The government ought to have exercised restraint in granting approvals in violation of the Master Plan. The hotelier could have waited till the final decision of the court, without risking such huge investment. Approval despite serious allegations of arbitrary and corrupt practices in change of land use and the mammoth construction ignoring court proceedings means that this case shows utter disregard of court proceedings by both the government and the hotelier,” Sharma added.
The former revenue board member further said, “It may well be argued that now after so much money has already been spent in construction, it would be unwise to demolish it. We would like to suggest that the government consider taking over the building for use for some other purpose that could be less detrimental to the environment. It could be used as a training site for Scouts and Guides. A government office could function from it, offering training in conservation of the ecology – these could function with greater austerity and limit the damage already done
