GCC backs ease of doing business, seeks safeguards for J&K’s ecology and planning laws

Group of Concerned Citizens flags eight action points, calls for clarity on building norms, school standards and industrial-plot allotments

Srinagar, October 19: The Group of Concerned Citizens (GCC), Jammu & Kashmir, has supported efforts to improve ease of doing business while calling for amendments and clarifications to the new law to protect the region’s fragile ecology, statutory planning requirements, building safety and public welfare.

In a public statement issued to Ziraat Times today, the GCC welcomed the ongoing debate on the law and said the objective should be to strike a balance between simplifying business procedures and protecting the environment, which it described as being of existential importance to the people of Jammu & Kashmir.

Acknowledging that bureaucratic delays, overlapping permissions and arbitrary discretion have burdened entrepreneurs, the group supported time-bound approvals, digital single-window systems, transparent procedures and the removal of redundant clearances. However, it questioned whether these objectives could be achieved without weakening statutory planning, building safety and public accountability.

The GCC identified Section 22 as a particular area requiring scrutiny. It said Section 22(1) provides for relaxation of Master Plan conditions, Section 22(2) provides for deemed change of land use following approval, and Section 22(3) appears to permit an enterprise notwithstanding the Master Plan, building bye-laws and other applicable laws, subject to the Negative List.

The group called for Section 30(2) to be read alongside Section 22 to establish the scope of the law’s overriding effect. It said the legislation should clarify whether any override is confined to the specific relaxation lawfully approved and ensure that substantive planning controls are not displaced by implication.

While welcoming the protection afforded under Section 30(4) to specified environmental laws, the GCC sought comparable clarity for urban and regional planning legislation, Master Plans, development-control regulations and building-safety provisions.

“Environmental protection and planned urban development are complementary safeguards,” the statement said, warning that protecting one while leaving the other open to displacement could create a regulatory imbalance.

Concerns over building exemptions and inspections

The GCC said the Negative List should not substitute for spatial planning, pointing out that an activity may not be prohibited in itself but could still be unsuitable at a particular location because of inadequate road access, drainage, sewerage, utilities or environmental capacity.

It also raised concerns over Schedule III’s provision allowing residential buildings up to 24 metres without prior permission. The group said the Government should clarify whether the exemption preserves compliance with floor area ratio (FAR), ground coverage, setbacks, access, road width, fire and life safety, and infrastructure-capacity requirements.

The proposed moratorium on inspections by competent authorities also requires safeguards, according to the GCC. It said the law should specify exceptions for reported or suspected violations, identify the authorities empowered to inspect, establish procedures for handling complaints and provide effective remedies against unauthorised or unsafe construction, including after completion.

The group added that removing selected No Objection Certificates should not extinguish the substantive requirements those clearances were intended to verify.

School education and statutory safeguards

The GCC expressed particular concern over the implications of the law for schools and colleges, saying procedural exemptions must not dilute minimum standards for site suitability, access, open space, sanitation, fire and life safety, and essential infrastructure.

It questioned how the Ease of Doing Business Act could override the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, a central legislation extended to Jammu & Kashmir in 2019.

The group also called for any changes to be reconciled with the J&K School Education Act, 2002, and its rules, as well as the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

Referring to NEP 2020’s emphasis on school infrastructure and standards, the GCC said streamlined approvals should not undermine requirements relating to safety, security, teachers, financial probity and governance, or permit institutions to operate without infrastructure commensurate with their enrolment.

It urged the Government to clarify how these statutory and policy requirements would be preserved under the new framework.

Industrial estates, professionals and local employment

On industrial parks, the GCC called for a transparent and enforceable framework governing the allotment and use of industrial plots. It said the rules should specify eligibility criteria, implementation timelines, safeguards against speculative holding and unauthorised changes of use, and obligations to establish and operate the approved industrial activity.

The group also sought clear standards for professionals registered or empanelled outside Jammu & Kashmir who are permitted to operate in the Union Territory without local registration. These should cover qualifications, professional accountability, insurance where appropriate, and enforceable disciplinary and grievance mechanisms.

Emphasising employment generation as a key justification for facilitating investment, the GCC asked the Government to clarify how the law would promote opportunities for local residents, including through lawful and transparent recruitment or training commitments linked to industrial-plot allotments and other appropriate incentives.

Calls for clarity in rules and enforcement

The GCC said the rules framed under the Act must identify responsible authorities, verification processes, technical scrutiny requirements and accountability mechanisms.

It also stressed that delegated legislation cannot exceed, amend or contradict the parent Act. While subordinate rules should not introduce restrictions inconsistent with the Act’s express provisions, facilitation measures should not be interpreted as silently extinguishing substantive planning and safety requirements.

The group said deficiencies in existing Master Plans and enforcement mechanisms should be addressed by updating plans, strengthening institutions, eliminating arbitrary procedures and improving compliance, rather than making statutory planning optional.

It called for exceptional relaxations to be based on objective criteria, recorded reasons, technical assessment and transparent accountability.

Eight action points proposed

The GCC urged the Government to consider eight measures in the public interest:

1. Clarify the relationship between Sections 22 and 30, including the scope of any overriding effect, while preserving applicable planning laws, Master Plans and development-control standards.

2. Ensure that the Negative List and Schedules III and IV do not displace location-specific planning, infrastructure-capacity assessments or environmental safeguards.

3. Clarify the exemption for residential buildings up to 24 metres and preserve enforceable requirements for FAR, ground coverage, setbacks, road access, fire and life safety, and infrastructure capacity.

4. Define the inspection moratorium, including exceptions for complaints and suspected violations, and provide effective post-construction enforcement against unauthorised or unsafe development.

5. Protect the objectives and requirements of the Right to Education Act, 2009, the J&K School Education Act, 2002, its rules, and relevant NEP 2020 standards for school safety, infrastructure, teachers, financial probity and governance.

6. Establish transparent rules for industrial-plot allotment, approved land use, implementation obligations and employment outcomes.

7. Set clear qualification, accountability and grievance-redressal standards for professionals recognised through registration or empanelment elsewhere.

8. Publish departmental responsibilities, technical capacity, verification procedures and enforcement mechanisms, with public consultation wherever required by law.

Concluding its statement, the GCC said the choice before Jammu & Kashmir was not between entrepreneurship and ecology, or between ease of doing business and ease of living, but between arbitrary administration and transparent, accountable regulation.

The group said procedures should be simplified, unnecessary delays eliminated and responsible enterprise facilitated without compromising statutory planning, educational standards, public safety or public welfare. Sustainable investment, it added, requires regulatory certainty, resilient infrastructure and well-planned cities and towns in the long term.