THE Supreme Court (SC), on Tuesday, allowed the Madhya Pradesh Government to proceed with publication of the draft Bhopal Master Plan and invite claims and objections. The development came during a hearing on commercial activities in residential areas and the sealing action undertaken by the Bhopal Municipal Corporation (BMC). The court has been examining compliance with its directions on unauthorised construction and change of land use. Final plan needs court approval:The State Government, however, will have to apprise the Supreme Court of the details before publishing the final Master Plan. The final plan can be notified only after it is placed before the court and approval is obtained, according to the proceedings described by the Government. Government gives assurance: Madhya Pradesh Government Counsel K Natarajan informed the court that discussions had been held with the State Government. The Government assured the court that no further committees would be constituted in connection with the matter and that the sealing process would not be obstructed.

 

The court accepted the assurance. Sealing compliance comes under focus:The Supreme Court also expressed concern over establishments in residential areas allegedly being sealed in the morning and reopening in the evening. The court directed the BMC to ensure strict compliance with its directions on sealing action. Residents raise ten complaints:Amicus Curiae A K Sinha informed the court that around 10 complaints had been received from Bhopal residents before Tuesday’s hearing. The complaints alleged that several establishments sealed by the BMC in August remained closed during the morning but reopened in the evening. 62,500 commercial units identified: The BMC had identified around 62,500 commercial establishments operating in areas covered by the exercise. Notices were issued to 8,084 establishments, accounting for about 13% of the total identified units. According to the information submitted in the matter, action was recorded against around 190 establishments, while 10 premises were officially sealed. The figures mean action was recorded against around 2.3% of establishments that received notices, while official sealing accounted for about 0.12% of the notified units.