J&K&L High Court Seeks Explanation From Admin Over Delay In Wetland Management Plans, Questions Why Other Ramsar Sites Were Ignored

The Court made these directions while perusing an affidavit filed by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change in compliance with the Court's order dated July 7, 2026. The Ministry informed the Court that the IMP proposals submitted by the J&K Government for three wetland reserves were not in conformity with the NPCA scheme and that the UT had not responded to its subsequent communication dated September 10, 2025.

A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohd. Yousuf Wani, took note of the Ministry's affidavit and directed the UT to explain the administrative delay. The Bench specifically observed that “it is necessary to have a Response of the UT of J&K” and required the response to clearly explain why the September 10, 2025 communication remained unanswered.

The PIL is a long-running environmental proceeding concerning the protection and conservation of wetlands, originally initiated in relation to Wular Lake and removal of encroachments within and around its catchment area. Earlier proceedings recorded issues including de-weeding of Wular and Manasbal lakes, removal of encroachments, conservation and development of the lakes, and formulation of integrated development and management plans.

In the present proceedings, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change informed the Court that the Government of J&K had, through a communication dated August 25, 2025, submitted Integrated Management Plans under the Centrally Sponsored NPCA scheme for the period 2025-26 to 2029-30, seeking consideration and administrative approval in respect of three wetland reserves.

The Ministry, however, found that the proposal was not in conformity with the NPCA scheme and accordingly addressed a communication to the UT Government on September 10, 2025. The communication required J&K to submit a separate Integrated Management Plan for each wetland in accordance with the NPCA Guidelines, 2024.

The Ministry told the Court that the J&K Government had not responded to that communication as yet. It further informed the Bench that although the NPCA scheme had formally continued only up to March 31, 2026, it had subsequently received an interim extension until September 30, 2026, while its continuation for the 2026-31 financial cycle remained under consideration by the competent authority.

After considering the Ministry's affidavit, the Bench found it necessary to obtain a specific response from the UT Government rather than proceed on the basis of the Centre's affidavit alone. The Court directed that the response be filed by way of an affidavit and that it clearly address the reasons for the administrative inaction.

The Bench specifically required the UT Government to explain “why the communication dated 10.09.2025 has not been responded so far” and, simultaneously, “why the separate IMPs for each of the three wetland reserves have not been re-submitted to the Ministry.”

Significantly, the Bench also widened the scope of the explanation sought from the UT Government. It directed the affidavit to explain “why the other Ramsar Sites in the UT of J&K have been ignored while processing/submitting the IMPs to the Ministry concerned.”

The Court also took note of the Ministry's statement regarding the time-bound nature of the NPCA scheme. The Ministry had informed the Bench that the scheme had expired on March 31, 2026, although an interim extension had been granted until September 30, 2026, while continuation for the 2026-31 cycle was under consideration.

The Court granted three weeks' time for filling the requisite affidavit. The matter was directed to be listed on September 21, 2026 for further review.

Case Title: Kashmir Environmental Protection v. State of J&K

Appearances

Petitioner: Nadeem Qadri, Advocate

Respondents: T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with Rehana, Advocate; Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel

Click here to read/download Judgment