The state level committee (SLP), which was constituted to study the over 3,500 suggestions, proposals and corrections forwarded by individuals and institutions,
met on Tuesday, and it signals the beginning of a process to either finalise, tinker, or overturn the basic principles of Regional Plan 2021, depending on which direction it chooses to take. The committee has sought information from various departments, data on forests and mining and will undertake a study on changes made in regional plans
from 2001 to 2021. The deputy chief minister informed the media that a decision will be taken later on whether to include private forests or not as the surveys have not been done in a scientific manner. Investment promotion zones marked by the Industrial Promotion Board will also have to be inserted in the plan. In other words, Regional Plan 2021 is headed for some major changes.
Although it would be premature to attribute motives to the
SLC and unfair to predict the outcome
after just one meeting, the
broad outline drawn by the SLC
seems to suggest more of a midterm
review of the entire plan,
which is a much larger exercise. If
not kept under control this process
could undermine the bottom-top
approach of the plan and result in
major changes without consent
of the people. It is the manner in
which the applications for change
have been categorized that gives away the game.
The previous SLC had to sift through 8,500 comments which
were categorized into four groups. a) Rectification of errors /
gazette changes inadvertently omitted. b) Request for change
in zone. c) Comments on Draft RP 2021 report and plans. d)
Comments from local bodies/village planning committees.
Under the guidelines, all requests for change of zone in Eco I
areas were discarded. Applications requesting change of zone
up to 1,000 m2 were considered only in orchard zone and if
they were contiguous to existing settlement areas. Only gazette
notified changes in RP 2001 were incorporated and hence
all anomalies in RP 2001 were corrected.
The categorisation adopted by the present SLC is quite different.
It has listed the comments under, new settlements in
Eco I, settlement in non-Eco I, restore RP 2001 settlement in
Eco I and restore settlement zone in non-Eco I areas. This categorization
seems to suggest that the SLC is open to the idea of
allowing fresh settlement areas in Eco I areas.
The danger in the present approach of the SLC is that the
guidelines are not being set at the beginning, but somewhere
in the middle or the end. This is like putting the cart before the
horse. We do understand that the government is under pressure
to open up more land for settlement purposes and this
demand is not coming from builders alone, but also from individuals
who want to cash in on the high land prices and genuine
land owners who want to expand existing houses to accommodate
growing families. Besides, there are also demands
from industry to consider. In that sense, this is a mid-term review
of RP 2021 and not rectification or finalization.
The only way to reduce pressure on the SLC and ensure that
the process is transparent is to give people access to it at every
stage. Village panchayats must be kept informed of every
change or this process could end up destroying RP 2021. It’s
something the SLC needs to consider every step of the way.
