KARACHI: An environmental tribunal has suspended the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) approval accorded by the Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa) to a project meant for allegedly commercialising the seafront in the name of development by the Cantonment Board Clifton (CBC).

Headed by its chairman retired Justice Nisar Muhammad Shaikh, the tribunal also remanded the matter back to Sepa with the direction to decide the same afresh in accordance with the law.

The tribunal passed these directives while disposing of an appeal filed by a group of citizens — including Arif Belgaumi, Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy, Ayesha Tammy Haq and others — expressing their concerns about the proposed commercialisation of the seafront from Nishan-i-Pakistan Park to Chunky Monkey in the Phase-V of the Defence Housing Authority.

Their counsel submitted that the CBC had purportedly in compliance with Section 17 of the Sindh Environmental Protection Act, 2014 had filed an IEE report with Sepa on Dec 18, 2019 about the project spread over 20.89 acres, which entails the development of one-kilometre-long Seaview beach.

Residents challenge development of one-km-long beach from Nishan-i-Pakistan Park to Chunky Monkey

“It is planned to build two beach docks, a jogging track, fountains, monuments, restaurants and tuck shops, hawkers and street stalls, a children’s play area, green areas spreading over 13.5 acres and watchtowers,” they explained.

They alleged the said project was actually a part of a plan for commercialisation of the Clifton beach, which the CBC was attempting from many years, adding that the CBC was occupying the beach in parts from Dolman Mall to Village Restaurant.

It allowed construction of the Dolmen Mall on an amenity plot and commercialised the area adjacent to it for private car parking and on its other side the area was used for discharge of untreated solid waste into the sea after a commercial fast food outlet was constructed and adjacent to it a few years ago new boundary walled Nishan-i-Pakistan Park was constructed.

The area between Nishan-i-Pakistan to Village Restaurant was open for citizens, but from quite some time the mushroom construction of small and large eateries were allowed, the appellants claimed.

The appellants also submitted a copy of the Google map showing trespassing on the beach in the last 20 years.

The appellants alleged that Sepa had granted IEE approval dated Feb 19, 2020 in respect of the “Development of Beach” of the CBC in violation of the provisions of the Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Review of Initial Environmental Examination and Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations, 2014 arguing that said project in fact required filing of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) instead of IEE.

The counsel argued that the project required an EIA as it was falling under the entry number (4) and (5) of the category “I” namely “Urban Development and Tourism” and the entry (2) of the category “K” in respect of the project likely to cause an adverse environmental effect, which were the categories listed for the projects requiring an EIA under Schedule-II of the Regulations, 2014.

He maintained that though the proposed project did not fall within any of the listed categories requiring an IEE under the Schedule-I read with Sub-regulation (2) of the Regulation 6, it was patently illegal in the absence of mandatorily required recommendations of the committee, which was never constituted in compliance with Regulation 24.

On this contravention of the relevant law the impugned decision of approval of the proposed project is liable to be set aside being of no legal effect, he added.

A counsel representing the CBC and law officer for Sepa contended that the appeal was time barred as the same was filed on Nov 12, 2020 after the delay of about eight months of the impugned decision though the period of limitation as provided under Section 27 of the Act, 2014 was 30 days only. Therefore, on this ground the appeal was liable to be dismissed, they added.

The counsel for the appellants rebutted that his clients came to know about the project in July 2020 and then they approached Sepa on July 15, 2020 with an application for supply of copy of the IEE report, which they finally succeeded to get on Oct 15, 2020.

The tribunal’s head observed that Section 27 of the Act of 2014 provides that any person aggrieved by any order or direction of the Agency may prefer an appeal within 30 days of the date of communication of the impugned order or direction to such person.

A law officer for Sepa submitted that the project of the cantonment board was not a mega project but a small project, therefore, the IEE study report filed by the cantonment board was duly approved under the category “K” of Schedule-I read with Regulation 6(2) of the Regulations, 2014.

Likewise, the CBC chief executive officer also filed objections.

However, the tribunal’s head observed that in his detailed objections nowhere the CEO stated if they were not directed or required to file an IEE and they voluntarily filed the IEE and their project did not fall in any category listed in the Schedule-I and II, as claimed in the arguments.

Published in Dawn, November 12th, 2021