SRINAGAR: The Environment Policy Group has supported the Jammu and Kashmir Ease of Doing Business Act, 2026, while cautioning that provisions allowing regulatory relaxation and deemed approvals must not weaken statutory planning, environmental safeguards or disaster-risk controls in the Union Territory.
In its assessment of the legislation, the Group has raised particular concerns over Section 22, saying the broad powers to relax or modify regulatory requirements could enable executive decisions to circumvent established planning procedures.
The Group said Master Plans and Zonal Plans were statutory planning instruments based on land-use assessments, infrastructure requirements, environmental considerations, public consultation and development constraints, and should not be treated as administrative requirements that could be relaxed merely to facilitate investment.
“EoDB must not override statutory spatial planning,” it said, warning that exemptions granted outside the established planning framework could create uncertainty in development regulation.
J&K’s planning system under the Jammu Kashmir Development Act, 1970, is centred on statutory Master Plans and Zonal Plans. The Group said dilution of these instruments through executive orders or exemptions could undermine both regulatory predictability and long-term planning.
It also cautioned that faster approvals should not come at the expense of safety in a region exposed to earthquakes, floods, landslides, unstable slopes and wetland loss.
Referring to the Srinagar Master Plan, the Group said flood-absorption areas, wetlands, seismic constraints and physical limits on urban expansion were among the factors that needed to remain integral to development decisions.
“Ease of Doing Business must not become Ease of Building Anywhere,” the Group said.
The organisation also questioned the blanket use of deemed approvals, saying time-bound clearances could reduce avoidable administrative delays but should not automatically apply to decisions involving substantive planning, environmental or public-safety concerns.
It said proposals involving land-use changes, flood-absorption areas, wetlands, steep slopes, heritage areas or major infrastructure should undergo appropriate risk assessment rather than receive automatic approval solely because an authority failed to act within a stipulated period.
The Group, however, endorsed risk-based regulation if supported by objective criteria, reliable spatial data and capable institutions. It suggested integrating J&K’s GIS-based planning systems and disaster-risk assessment mechanisms with the EoDB framework so that the level of scrutiny reflects the actual risks associated with individual projects.
“Risk classification should determine the level of scrutiny, rather than reduce scrutiny indiscriminately,” it said.
On environmental regulation, the Group called for a distinction between unnecessary duplication and substantive safeguards. It said overlapping procedures and excessive paperwork could be removed, but environmental, structural, fire-safety, land-use and public-safety requirements should remain enforceable.
Its stated objective was “single-window regulation, not single-window deregulation”.
The Group also sought greater transparency in the exercise of powers relating to relaxation, exemption and deemed approval. It said such provisions should operate under clearly defined criteria, with written reasons, public disclosure and appropriate review or appeal mechanisms.
It further stressed the importance of public consultation where regulatory changes could significantly affect land use, development controls or environmental safeguards.
“Public participation is essential to legitimate planning,” it said, arguing that changes made without adequate disclosure, consultation and reasons could erode confidence in the planning process.
The Group said reforms implemented in other states under the national Business Reform Action Plan showed that improving the business environment did not require dismantling spatial planning or building-control systems. It cited measures such as single-window systems, digitisation, online building permissions, time-bound approvals, rationalised inspections and risk-based scrutiny as ways to simplify compliance while retaining substantive safeguards.
It has called for the J&K Act to be implemented with protections for Master Plans, Zonal Plans, the Unified Building Bye-Laws, environmental regulations and risk-sensitive development controls.
The Group has also sought specific legal and planning scrutiny of Section 22 to ensure that executive facilitation does not override the statutory planning framework.
“The issue is where deregulation ends and essential public-interest regulation begins,” it said.
The Environment Policy Group maintained that economic development, environmental protection and disaster resilience could be pursued together through regulation that is transparent, proportionate and informed by risk.
It said its detailed examination of the 2026 Act was continuing and that further recommendations would be submitted to the government and made available to the public after the review is completed.
