https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773461 The SC set aside the HC's direction to demolish a recreational park and restore a century-old lake. The HC had relied on the public trust doctrine and constitutional provisions under Articles 48A and 51A(g), holding that water body preservation constitutes an absolute constitutional mandate superseding developmental considerations. However, the SC found the HC's reasoning flawed, emphasizing that the public trust doctrine must be harmonized with sustainable development and evolving public welfare priorities. The SC noted significant delay in seeking judicial intervention - the petition was filed in 2012, nearly five years after the project commenced in 2008 and well after completion in 2011. This delay created an irreversible situation where substantial public resources were expended and the recreational facility became integral to community life. The SC concluded that no public purpose would be served by undoing what time and community acceptance had legitimized. Appeal allowed. en-us Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jun 2025 14:58:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773461 The SC set aside the HC's direction to demolish a recreational park and restore a century-old lake. The HC had relied on the public trust doctrine and constitutional provisions under Articles 48A and 51A(g), holding that water body preservation constitutes an absolute constitutional mandate superseding developmental considerations. However, the SC found the HC's reasoning flawed, emphasizing that the public trust doctrine must be harmonized with sustainable development and evolving public welfare priorities. The SC noted significant delay in seeking judicial intervention - the petition was filed in 2012, nearly five years after the project commenced in 2008 and well after completion in 2011. This delay created an irreversible situation where substantial public resources were expended and the recreational facility became integral to community life. The SC concluded that no public purpose would be served by undoing what time and community acceptance had legitimized. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773461